alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Ralph Gonzalez, Respondent, et al., Plaintiff, v. Betty Levine, Appellant.

Judgment in favor of plaintiff in the sum of $80,217.50 reversed, on the law and on the facts, the verdict vacated, and a new trial granted, with costs to defendant-appellant, unless plaintiff stipulates to accept $50,000 in lieu of the award by verdict, in which event the judgment is modified to that extent, and is affirmed as thus modified, with costs to defendant-appellant. In this personal injury negligence action it is evident that the jury verdict is grossly excessive in its award of damages, and that a verdict in excess of $50,000 is *906not warranted by the record. Concur — McNally, J. P., Stevens and Steuer, JJ.; Eager and Bastow, JJ., dissent and vote to affirm. Settle order on notice.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ORBCOMM
GLOBAL, L.P. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 10Q FILLING
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           4,507
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,253
<ALLOWANCES>                                       759
<INVENTORY>                                     16,506
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                46,012
<PP&E>                                         434,130
<DEPRECIATION>                                  84,133
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 417,089
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           45,839
<BONDS>                                        170,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     171,048
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   417,089
<SALES>                                          1,683
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,683
<CGS>                                            3,284
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,284
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                33,670<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   500
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,222<F2>
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (41,993)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (41,993)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (41,993)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>INCLUDES $12,504 AS DEPRECIATION EXPENSES, $10 AS GOODWILL AMORTIZATION AND $495
AS EQUITY IN NET LOSSES OF AFFILIATES.
<F2>NET OF INTEREST INCOME OF $81.
</FN>


</TABLE>
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****OSC Update [electronicresource].**
 
2004-apr|2005- jan|oct-2005|2006-nov|2007-april|2008 -- fall|2010 -- 4th|2nd quarter update
 
SuDoc Number:J 1.116::

Item Number: 0483-E-25 (online)

CGP systemNumber:000608877
Aug 1, 2018
#### § 96.65 Scope.

The provisions in this subpart establish the procedures for routine oversight of accredited agencies and approved persons.

[71 FR 8131, Feb. 15, 2006, as amended at 79 FR 40636, July 14, 2014]
P OST OFFICE B OX 12548, A USTIN , TEXAS 78711-2548 TEL : (512)463-2100 WWW . TEXASATTORNEYGENERAL . GOV

An Equal Employment Opportunity Employer · 

March 30, 2015

Jeffrey D. Kyle, Clerk Ele c tro nic Filing

Third Court of Appeals

Price Daniel, Sr. Building

209 West 14th Street, Room 101

Austin, Texas 78701

Re: Notification of Argument; No. 03-14-00302-CV;

The Railroad Commission of Texas; CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp., d/b/a 

CenterPoint Energy Entex; and CenterPoint Energy Texas Gas v. Gulf Coast Coalition

of Cities

Dear Mr. Kyle:

This acknowledges receipt of your letter dated March 24, 2015, giving notice this appeal

will be submitted on May 20, 2015 at 1:30 p.m. I will appear and argue on behalf of

Appellant, the Railroad Commission of Texas.

Regards,

/s/ Kellie E. Billings-Ray 

Kellie E. Billings-Ray

Assistant Attorney General

P.O. Box 12548, MC-066

Austin, Texas 78711-2548

(512) 463-2012

cc. John Griffin, Railroad Commission

Dane McKaughan

Christopher L. Brewster

ACCEPTED

03-14-00302-CV

4695742

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

3/30/2015 3:03:00 PM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 3/30/2015 3:03:00 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANDREW CONLEY,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

COSTAMARE SHIPPING CO S.A.,

Defendant(s).

___________________________________/

Case No. C09-01955 JCS

ORDER VACATING FEBRUARY 12,

2010 MEDIATION DEADLINE AND

CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT

CONFERENCE

On February 4, 2010, the parties field a Joint Case Management Conference Statement

requesting that the Court cancel the requirement that the parties participate in mediation by 

February 12, 2010 and schedule a further case management conference for mid May.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that participation in mediation by February 12, 2010 is vacated,

and a further case management conference is set for May 14, 2010, at 1:30 p.m. An updated joint

case management conference statement shall be filed by May 7, 2010.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 8, 2010

_______________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:09-cv-01955-JCS Document 23 Filed 02/08/10 Page 1 of 1
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Timothy Harrison, Appellant, v. Edward M. Fay, as Warden of Green Haven Prison, Respondent.

In a habeas corpus proceeding, relator appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated June 15, 1961, which dismissed the writ and remanded him to the custody of respondent. Order affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.
STIPULATION REGARDING STATUS CONFERENCE 

Case No. C 09-01982 MHP 

1

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

WORLDS.COM INC., 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

NCSOFT CORP., 

 Defendant. 

CASE NO. C 09-01982 MHP 

JOINT STIPULATION REGARDING 

ADJOURNMENT OF APRIL 5, 2010 

STATUS CONFERENCE 

Judge: Hon. Marilyn H. Patel 

 Courtroom 15, 18th Floor 

The Court has scheduled a Status Conference in this action for April 5, 2010 

(Docket Entry 75). The Parties desire a three-week adjournment of that date, and jointly 

state and stipulate as follows: 

1. The parties have almost completed settlement discussions and, subject to 

final approvals and execution of a final agreement, expect to file a stipulation of dismissal 

of this action. 

2. The parties believe that a three-week adjournment of the April 5, 2010 Status 

Conference will likely obviate the need for a further Status Conference. 

3. The April 5, 2010 Status Conference is rescheduled for April 26, 2010 at 

03:00 PM in Courtroom 15, 18th Floor, San Francisco, or a subsequent date that is 

convenient for the Court. 

 

// 

//

Case 3:09-cv-01982-MHP Document 77 Filed 04/06/10 Page 1 of 2
STIPULATION REGARDING STATUS CONFERENCE 

Case No. C 09-01982 MHP 

2

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

Dated: April 2, 2010 

Respectfully submitted, 

David Commins 

COMMINS & KNUDSEN, P.C. 

400 Montgomery St., Suite 200 

San Francisco, CA 94104 

Tel: 415.391.6490 

Fax: 415.391.6493 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Worlds.com Inc. 

Stephen F. Roth (pro hac vice) 

Russell W. Faegenburg (pro hac vice) 

Keir J. LoIacono (pro hac vice) 

LERNER, DAVID, LITTENBERG, 

 KRUMHOLZ & MENTLIK, LLP

600 South Avenue West 

Westfield, NJ 07090 

Tel: 908.654.5000 

Fax: 908.654.7866 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Worlds.com Inc. 

By: /s/ Russell W. Faegenburg .

Gabrielle E. Higgins (CSB # 163179)

ROPES & GRAY 

1900 University Avenue, 6th Floor 

East Palo Alto, CA 94303 

Tel: 650.617.4015 

Fax: 650.566.4131 

Attorneys for Defendant NCsoft Corp.

Jesse J. Jenner (pro hac vice) 

Gene W. Lee (pro hac vice) 

David S. Chun (pro hac vice) 

Brian P. Biddinger (CSB # 224604) 

Hanyong Lee (pro hac vice) 

ROPES & GRAY 

1211 Avenue of the Americas 

New York, NY 10036-8704 

Tel: 212.596.9000 

Fax: 212.596.9090 

Attorneys for Defendant NCsoft Corp.

By: /s/ David S. Chun .

4/5/2010

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Marilyn H. Patel

Case 3:09-cv-01982-MHP Document 77 Filed 04/06/10 Page 2 of 2
### §50b. Recording of obligations against accounts receivable and crediting of amounts received; work involving cooperation with State, Territory, etc.

Before, on, and after October 18, 1986, in carrying out work involving cooperation with any State, Territory, possession, or political subdivision thereof, the United States Geological Survey may, notwithstanding any other provision of law, record obligations against accounts receivable from any such entities and shall credit amounts received from such entities to this appropriation.

(Pub. L. 99–500, §101(h) [title I], Oct. 18, 1986, 100 Stat. 1783–242, 1783–252, and Pub. L. 99–591, §101(h) [title I], Oct. 30, 1986, 100 Stat. 3341–242, 3341–252; Pub. L. 102–154, title I, Nov. 13, 1991, 105 Stat. 1000.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This appropriation, referred to in text, probably means appropriations under the headings "Geological Survey" and "surveys, investigations, and research" of the annual Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.

#### Codification

Pub. L. 99–591 is a corrected version of Pub. L. 99–500.

In text, "Before, on, and after October 18, 1986" substituted for "heretofore and hereafter".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Change of Name

"United States Geological Survey" substituted in text for "Geological Survey" pursuant to provision of title I of Pub. L. 102–154, set out as a note under section 31 of this title.
### §2106. Relationship to other laws

#### (a) Law of salvage and law of finds

The law of salvage and the law of finds shall not apply to abandoned shipwrecks to which section 2105 of this title applies.

#### (b) Laws of United States

This chapter shall not change the laws of the United States relating to shipwrecks, other than those to which this chapter applies.

#### (c) Effective date

This chapter shall not affect any legal proceeding brought prior to April 28, 1988.

(Pub. L. 100–298, §7, Apr. 28, 1988, 102 Stat. 434.)
Third District.

#### Adelia M. Stickel, appellee, v. Simon A. Niebuhr, executor, appellant.

Claim against executor of a will. Judgment for plaintiff. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Logan county; the Hon. Frank Bindley, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1922.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed January 17, 1923.

Rehearing denied April 3, 1923.

Harold F. Trapp and Arthur Keithley, for appellant. Covey & Woods, for appellee.

Mr. Justice Heard

delivered the opinion of the court.
###### Editorial Note on Part 200

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 200 appear at 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004.

#### § 200.30 Nondiscrimination and equal opportunity.

The requirements set forth in 24 CFR part 5, and subparts I, J, and M of this part pertaining to nondiscrimination and equal opportunity, apply to these programs.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3090 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3090

  To suspend temporarily the duty on Pyromellitic Dianhydride (PMDA).

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 28, 2005

  Mr. Hobson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend temporarily the duty on Pyromellitic Dianhydride (PMDA).

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.05.14 of subchapter II of chapter 99 
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, relating to 
Pyromellitic Dianhydride (CAS # 89-32-7) is amended by striking 12/31/
2006 and inserting 12/31/2009.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### Nellie Hancock, appellee, v. The National Council of the Knights and Ladies of Security, appellant.

Gen. No. 28,181.

Suit on life insurance policy. Judgment for plaintiff on instruction of the court. Appeal from the Municipal Court of Chicago; the Hon. Joseph W. Sehulman, Judge, presiding. Heard in the first division of this court for the first district at the October term, 1922.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed May 28, 1923.

A. W. Fulton, John V. McCormick and S. J. Fulton, for appellant. Gustav E. Beerly and John R. McCabe, for appellee; Ellis S. Chesbrough, of counsel.

Mr. Justice Matchett

delivered the opinion of the court.
-       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2023-09-01T18:56:52-0400
      - Government Publishing Office, Washington, DC 20401
      - Government Publishing Office
      - Government Publishing Office attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by Government Publishing Office
### SUBCHAPTER VI—SALE OF PUBLIC LAND
#### Rance BOLTON, also known as Lance Moore, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Mike KNOWLES, Warden, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 05-15966.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 13, 2007 *.

Filed March 15, 2007.

Meredith J. Watts, Esq., San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Ranee Bolton, Vacaville, CA, pro se.

Ronald E. Niver, DAG, Peggy S. Ruffra, Esq., AGCA — Office of the California Attorney General, Oakland, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before: GRABER, McKEOWN, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Ranee Bolton, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition challenging his conviction for possession of stolen property. Bolton contends that the trial court’s admission into evidence of a witness’s preliminary hearing testimony infringed his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation in violation of *Crawford v. Washington,*541 U.S. 36, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004).

Bolton’s argument is unpersuasive. The Supreme Court recently held that the *Crawford*rule does not apply retroactively to cases, like this one, that are on collateral review. *Whorton v. Bockting,*- U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 1173, 167 L.Ed.2d 1 (2007). Bolton’s direct review became final in 1999. Therefore, his claim is governed by the standards set forth in *Ohio v. Roberts,*448 U.S. 56,100 S.Ct. 2531, 65 L.Ed.2d 597 (1980). The state court’s admission of the preliminary hearing testimony was neither contrary to, nor did it involve an unreasonable application of, clearly established Supreme Court precedent. *See id.*at 72-73, 100 S.Ct. 2531; *California v. Green,*399 U.S. 149,165-68, 90 S.Ct. 1930, 26 L.Ed.2d 489 (1970).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DONG YE-WAN, AKA Wandong Ye, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 17-72855 

Agency No. A087-455-726 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 18, 2023**

Before: GRABER, PAEZ, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. 

Dong Ye-Wan, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of 

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an 

immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his applications for asylum,

withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

JAN 23 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-72855 

(“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review factual 

findings for substantial evidence, applying the standards governing adverse 

credibility determinations under the REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 

1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for 

review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s adverse credibility determination 

based on inconsistencies regarding whether Ye-Wan’s wife was sterilized, the

amount of the fines Ye-Wan paid, when he learned of his wife’s pregnancy, and 

his wife’s location when family planning officials visited their home on December 

6, 2008. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination reasonable under “the 

totality of circumstances”). Ye-Wan’s explanations do not compel a contrary 

conclusion. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). Thus, in the 

absence of credible testimony in this case, Ye-Wan’s asylum and withholding of 

removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003). 

We do not consider Ye-Wan’s remaining contentions regarding the merits of 

his claims because the BIA did not decide them. See Santiago-Rodriguez v. 

Holder, 657 F.3d 820, 829 (9th Cir. 2011) (review limited to the grounds relied on 

by the BIA). 

Substantial evidence also supports the denial of Ye-Wan’s CAT claim 

because it was based on the same evidence found not credible, and Ye-Wan does 
3 17-72855 

not point to any other record evidence that compels the conclusion that it is more 

likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the 

government if returned to China. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1048-49. 

To the extent Ye-Wan contends that the IJ violated his right to due process, 

we lack jurisdiction to consider it because he did not raise this claim before the 

BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (petitioner 

must exhaust issues or claims in administrative proceedings below). 

The temporary stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
```

                                                                                                 Exhibit 99.2

                                                         **REPORT OF INDEPENDENT
                                                   REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

To the Board of Directors
Structured Obligations Corporation
New York, New York

We have examined the compliance of Structured Obligations Corporation (Depositor) and U.S. Bank National Association (Trustee) with
the Base Trust Agreement and the Select Notes Trust Supplement LT 2004-1 (the Agreements) relating to the administration of the
underlying securities and related credit support deposited in or held by the Select Notes Trust LT 2004-1 for the year ended December
31, 2006.  Depositor's management is responsible for compliance with those requirements.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion
on compliance with the Agreements based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and,
accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about Depositor's and Trustee's compliance with those requirements
described above and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  We believe that our
examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legal determination of Depositor's and
Trustee's compliance with specified requirements.

In our opinion, Depositor and Trustee complied, in all material respects, with the requirements described above of the Agreements for
the year ended December 31, 2006.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of Structured Obligations Corporation, U.S. Bank National Association, the
Securities and Exchange Commission and the Certificate Holders of the Select Notes Trust LT 2004-1, and is not intended to be, and
should not be used by anyone other than those specified parties.

/s/ RubinBrown LLP        
St. Louis, Missouri
March 2, 2007
```
#### Central of Georgia Railway Company v. Waxelbaum.

May 15, 1912.

Injunction. Before Judge Felton. Bibb superior court. September 29, 1911.

*Ellis & Jordan,*for plaintiff in error. *Jesse Harris,*contra.

Beck, J.

Under the evidence and pleadings there was no abuse of its discretion by the court below in granting an interlocutory injunction in the case. *Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
#### KUSHES v. GINSBURG.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 10, 1905.)

Action by Alter Kushes against Isidore Ginsburg. No opinion. Motion denied.
## QOT-OST - 9000-\^^S \

YOU R SUCCES S I S OU R BUSINES S

Apri l 23 , 201 0 To : Th e Unite dState s Departmen t o f Transportatio n Subject : Essentia l Ai r Service , Attentio n Denni s DeVane y Th e Greate r

Johnstown/Cambri aCount y Chambe r o f Commerc e support s Colga n Air' s continue dservic e a s Essentia l Ai r Servic e t o th e Joh n Murth aJohnstown-Cambri a Count y Airpor t

(JST) . A s avalue dmembe r

o f th e Chamber , Colga n ha s demonstrate dawillingnes s t o wor k wit hth e loca l busines s communit y t o adjus t schedule s an dtime s a s neede dt o bette r serv e th e community . W e fee l tha t

Colgan' s offe r

t o provid e thre e roun dtrip s eac hweekda y an dweeken d flight s a s wel l wit hbot hnon-sto p an done-sto p servic e betwee n Johnstown-Altoona Washingto n Dulle s woul dprovid e th e mos t beneficia l servic e t o ou r region . Th e continue dgrowt han dsucces s o f th e Joh n Murth aJohnstown-Cambri aCount y Airpor t i s critica l t o th e economi c developmen t o f ou r regio n an dw e fee l thi s ca n bes t b e accomplishe dthroug hacontinuin g an dpositiv e relationshi p wit hColga n Air . Bes t regards .

Rober t F . Lay o Presiden t

& CE O