alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Edward W. ELDER, Appellant, v. TYSON FOODS, INC.; Snelling Personnel Services, Appellees, Barbara Faught, Defendant.

No. 00-2676.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted June 7, 2001.

Filed June 13, 2001.

Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Edward Elder appeals the District Court’s1 adverse judgment, following a *445bench trial, in his Title VII and Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) action against his former employer, Tyson Foods, Inc., and Snelling Personnel Services. He alleged race discrimination, age discrimination, and retaliation for filing prior discrimination charges against Tyson. Having reviewed the trial transcript and Elder’s exhibits, we find no clear error in the District Court’s findings. *See Estate of Davis v. Delo,*115 F.3d 1388, 1393 (8th Cir.1997) (standard of review).

We agree with the District Court that Elder failed to establish a prima facie case against either defendant under Title VII or the ADEA. *See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green,*411 U.S. 792, 802, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973) (prima facie case under Title VII); *Hindman v. Transkrit Corp.,*145 F.3d 986, 990 (8th Cir.1998) (applying *McDonnell Douglas*analysis to ADEA claim). He presented no evidence that the alleged adverse employment action by Tyson — giving negative references to prospective employers after Elder left Tyson — ever occurred. He also presented no evidence that Snelling refused to refer him for job orders matching his qualifications and demands, or was aware of his discrimination charges against Tyson.

As to Elder’s contention that various witnesses lied, the District Court’s determinations as to witness credibility are “virtually unreviewable on appeal,” *United States v. Heath,*58 F.3d 1271, 1275 (8th Cir.), *cert. denied,*516 U.S. 892, 116 S.Ct. 240, 133 L.Ed.2d 167 (1995), and Elder presented only his own speculation to contradict their testimony. We reject Elder’s remaining arguments as meritless, and we deny his pending motions.

' Accordingly, we affirm. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.
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 MINUTE ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

GENE JUAREZ SALONS, INC., et al.,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendant(s).

NO. C05-2153P 

AMENDED MINUTE ORDER

The following minute order is made by the direction of the court, the Honorable Marsha J.

Pechman:

The Minute Order previously entered in this matter on February 27, 2006 (Dkt. No. 8) is

hereby STRICKEN.

At the request of counsel, the deadline for submission of the Joint Status Report is hereby

continued to March 15, 2006. All other FRCP 26-related deadlines are continued accordingly.

Filed this 6th day of March, 2006.

BRUCE RIFKIN, Clerk

By /s Mary Duett

Deputy Clerk

Case 2:05-cv-02153-MJP Document 9 Filed 03/06/06 Page 1 of 1
PATRICK R. COX,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-1843

_____________________________/

Opinion filed October 7, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Columbia County.

Wesley R. Douglas, Judge.

M. Blair Payne, Public Defender, and Ryan A. Terry, Assistant Public Defender, 

Lake City; Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant 

Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, C.J., MARSTILLER, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

No. 22

- 10424 Summary Calendar

**United States of America,**

Plaintiff

— Appellee **,**

versus

**Cardell Mimms,**

Defendant

— Appellant

**.**

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:18

- CR

- 59

- 1

Before **Higginbotham, Graves,** and **Ho,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Cardell Mimms
has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Mimms has not filed a response. We have reviewed

* Pursuant to **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in **5th Cir cuit**  **R ule**  47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED September 22, 2022
Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-10424 Document: 00516481604 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/22/2022No. 22

- 10424

2 counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellat e review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to
withdraw is **GRANTED** , counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the **APPEAL IS DISMISSED**

. See **5th Cir. R.** 42.2

. Case: 22-10424 Document: 00516481604 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/22/2022
STIPULATION RE: WAIVER OF DAMAGES AND REMAND TO STATE 

COURT – PAGE 1 

272757 / 1523.0008

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

FORSBERG & UMLAUF, P.S. 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

900 FOURTH AVENUE • SUITE 1700 

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98164-1039 

(206) 689-8500 • (206) 689-8501 FAX 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 

NANCY JOHNSON, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

TARGET CORPORATION, a Minnesota 

Corporation; and TARGET STORES, INC., a 

Minnesota Corporation, 

Defendants. 

No. C06-5094RJB 

STIPULATION RE: WAIVER OF 

DAMAGES AND REMAND TO STATE 

COURT 

 

 With regard to the claims for damages which are the subject of the Complaint herein, 

Plaintiff Nancy Johnson hereby agrees to release Target Corporation and improperly named 

Target Stores, Inc., from all such claims in excess of $70,000 and to waive all claims for 

damages in excess of $70,000. In exchange for this waiver/release, the parties hereby agree 

that the case may be remanded back to state court. 

 This agreement shall not release, waive or bar plaintiff’s claims herein up to and 

including $70,000.00. 

Case 3:06-cv-05094-RJB Document 8 Filed 03/13/06 Page 1 of 2
STIPULATION RE: WAIVER OF DAMAGES AND REMAND TO STATE 

COURT – PAGE 2 

272757 / 1523.0008

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

FORSBERG & UMLAUF, P.S. 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

900 FOURTH AVENUE • SUITE 1700 

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98164-1039 

(206) 689-8500 • (206) 689-8501 FAX 

 DATED this 3rd day of March, 2006. 

FORSBERG & UMLAUF, P.S. 

By: s/ 

 Roy A. Umlauf, WSBA #15437 

 Attorneys for Defendant Target Corporation 

 DATED this 3rd day of March, 2006 

SCHAUERMANN THAYER & JACOBS 

By: s/ 

 Jeffrey P. Jacobs, WSBA #24987 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

ORDER 

 This matter having come before the court on this stipulation of the parties, the court 

hereby remands the case to Clark County Superior Court Cause No. 06-2-00092-1. 

 DATED this 13th day of March, 2006. 

 AROBERT J. BRYAN 

 United States District Judge 

Case 3:06-cv-05094-RJB Document 8 Filed 03/13/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 60205.

protest 217157-K (San Juan, P. R.).

#### J. M. Altieri *v.*United States,

Donlon, Judge:

Plaintiff is a customhouse broker. He filed with the collector at San Juan, P. R., a letter, dated November 1, 1953, complaining of the collector’s demand that plaintiff repay $51.12, stated to have been erroneously refunded by the collector to plaintiff as excess storage charges collected in connection with merchandise imported under two entries, No. 4484, April 13, 1953, and No. 01076, of April 17, 1953. The merchandise had been stored in general order warehouse.

The collector treated plaintiff’s letter as a protest under section 514 of the Tariff Act of 1930 and transmitted the letter to the court under section 515.

The official papers transmitted with the protest include entries No. 4484, April 13, 1953, and No. 01076, April 17, 1953, as well as correspondence between the collector and plaintiff and between the collector and the Bureau of Customs, Washington, D. C.

On trial, plaintiff appeared without counsel and testified in his own behalf. His brief testimony substantially confirms the official papers and correspondence. Plaintiff submitted, and defendant then moved to dismiss the protest on the ground that plaintiff “is not seeking to recover anything; he is seeking to stop the Government from asking him for money.” (P. 5.)

Section 514 does not authorize protest as a remedy against a collector’s demand for repayment of refunds alleged to have been erroneously made. While not identical as to facts, the decision of our appeals court in *Scherk Importing Co.*v. *United States,*17 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 135, T. D. 43470, is in point. It is not necessary for us here to decide whether the facts do or do not support the collector’s demand. We hold only that his demand does not give rise to a right in plaintiff to protest against the demand under section 514. Defendant’s motion to dismiss the protest is granted.
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

ORDER -1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff, 

v.

JOSE VAZQUEZ-LOPEZ 

Defendant. 

CASE NO.CR06-5101RBL

 

 ORDER GRANTING 

 CONTINUANCE OF

 TRIAL DATE

The defendant moves to continue the trial date. The government has no objection. For the

reasons stated in Mr. Campbell’s Affidavit, the motion is GRANTED and the Trial Date is

CONTINUED to October 16, 2006.

In view of the foregoing, the court finds and rules as follows:

1. Failure to grant a continuance in this matter would deny the defense the reasonable time

necessary for effective preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence. Title 18

U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(B)(iv). 

2. The ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the interest of the

public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Title 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(A). The period of delay

resulting from this continuance from JUNE 5, 2006 to OCTOBER 16, 2006 is excluded for

speedy trial computation purposes under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) and (B) as this is a

reasonable period of delay.

Case 3:06-cr-05101-RBL Document 56 Filed 06/01/06 Page 1 of 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

ORDER -2

ACCORDINGLY:

The Jury Trial is CONTINUED to Monday, OCTOBER 16, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. 

No Pretrial Conference is rescheduled at this time.

The Motions Cutoff date is extended to SEPTEMBER 12, 2006.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 1st day of June, 2006.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER -2

Case 3:06-cr-05101-RBL Document 56 Filed 06/01/06 Page 2 of 2
# A p p e n d i x E



# D r a f t C o m p a n y R e p o r t : S u m m a r y o f B a s e l i n e

E m i s s i o n s a n d P r o d u c t C o n t e n t

O c t o b e r 2 0 1 2

N O N C B I2010/15PFOAGlobalStewardshipProgramDraftCompanyReport:SummaryofBaselineEmissionsandProductContentSECTION1:REPORTDATEOctober2012SECTION2:COMPANYIDENTIFICATIONCompanyNameSOLVAYSOLEXIS,INC.2aStreetAddress10LEONARDLANEWESTDEPTFORD,NJ08086SECTION3:SUMMARYOFEMISSIONSReportingPeriod(usecalendaryear-e.g.Jan1,2000toDec31,2000)JAN1,2011TODEC31,2011ReleasestoallenvironmentalmediafromfluoropolymerandtelomermanufactureOperationsChemicalcategorykgs1mersfluoropolyofkgscategoryofkgstelomersofkgscategoryofkgsPFOAandPFOAsaltsNANANAHigherhomologuesZEROZERONA3aU.S.facilitiesPrecursorsNANANAPFOAandPFOAsaltsNANANAHigherhomologuesNANANA3bNon-U.S.facilitiesPrecursorsNANANAPleaseprovideinformationonthemethods,assumptions,uncertaintiesanddetectionlimitsforthedataprovidedabove.3cSECTION4:SUMMARYOFPRODUCTCONTENTReportingPeriod(usecalendaryear-e.g.Jan1,2000toDec31,2000)JAN1,2011TODEC31,2011ProducttypeFluoropolymerdispersionsOtherfluoropolymers1Telomerbasedproducts4aProductionvolume(kgs/year)2>1,000,000>1,000,000NAConcentration3OperationsChemicalcategoryFluoropolymerdispersions4(ppmwet-weight)Otherfluoropolymers1,5(ppbdry-weight)Telomerbasedproducts6(ppbdry-weight)PFOA,PFOAsaltsandhigherhomologues<10ppm<5ppmNA4bU.S.facilitiesPrecursors000PFOA,PFOAsaltsandhigherhomologuesNANANA4cNon-U.S.facilitiesPrecursorsNANANAPleaseprovideinformationonthemethods,assumptions,uncertaintiesanddetectionlimitsforthedataprovidedabove.4dProductcontentisreportedforproductsmanufacturedand/orimportedbySolvaySolexis,Inc.in2011.1FluoropolymersmanufacturedwithPFOA.2Usethefollowingranges:(1)Zero(2)>0–10kgs;(3)>10kgs–100kgs;(4)>100kgs–1,000kgs;(5)>1,000kgs–10,000kgs;(6)>10,000kgs–100,000kgs;(7)>100,000kgs–1,000,000kgs;(8)Over1,000,000kgs.3Concentrationshouldreflecttheconcentrationofchemicalintheproductassoldbythereportingcompany.Ifthereportingcompanyhasinformationconcerningtheconcentrationofchemicalintheproductasusedbyothers–forexample,asincorporatedbydilutionintoaformulation–thatadditionalinformationwouldalsobehelpful.4Thisvalueshouldbeexpressedasaweightedaverageconcentrationandrange.5Thisvalueshouldbeexpressedasamaximumconcentration.6Thisvalueshouldbeexpressedasasimple(notweighted)averageandrange.
EXHIBIT 32 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350  In connection with the accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-K of Top Flight GameBirds, Inc. for the period ending February 28, 2010, I, Rhonda Heskett, President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors of Top Flight Game Birds, Inc. hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:  1.Such annual report of Form 10-K for the period ending February 28, 2010, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.The information contained in such annual report of Form 10-K for the year ending February 28, 2010, fairly represents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Top Flight Game Birds, Inc.  Date:  May 27, 2010Top Flight GameBirds, Inc.By: /s/   Rhonda HeskettRhonda Heskett
President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer,
Principal Accounting Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors
fund_ex102.htm

EXHIBIT 10.2 

 

RESIGNATION AS PRESIDENT, SECRETARY, TREASURER

 

AND CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

 

I, Chayut Ardwichai, having been appointed President, Secretary, Treasurer and Chairman of the Board of Directors of FundThatCompany a Nevada Corporation, do hereby resign said positions effective on this 9th Day of April, 2018. 

 

/s/ Chayut Ardwichai                                  

 

Chayut Ardwichai
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 192 (Thursday, October 5, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 69243]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22205]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #18211 and #18212; LA JOLLA BAND OF LUISENO 
INDIANS Disaster Number CA-00389]


Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster for Public 
Assistance Only for the La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major 
disaster for Public Assistance Only for the La Jolla Band of Luiseno 
Indians (FEMA-4743-DR), dated 09/27/2023.
    Incident: Tropical Storm Hilary.
    Incident Period: 08/19/2023 through 08/21/2023.

DATES: Issued on 09/27/2023.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/27/2023.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/27/2024.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd 
Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the President's major disaster declaration on 09/27/2023, Private Non-
Profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental 
nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above 
or other locally announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Area: La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Physical Damage:
  Non-Profit Organizations with Credit Available Elsewhere...      2.375
  Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.375
For Economic Injury:
  Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere      2.375
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 18211 8 
and for economic injury is 18212 0.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)


Francisco S[aacute]nchez, Jr.,
Associate Administrator, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience.
[FR Doc. 2023-22205 Filed 10-4-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
Exhibit 32.1

Written Statement of the Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, I, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer of Smart & Final Inc. (the
Company), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended October 8, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      
|----------------------
|/s/ Etienne Snollaerts
|Etienne Snollaerts    
|November 13, 2006
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 21, 2020

No. 04

- 20

- 00249

- CR

The STATE of Texas, Appellant

v. Chase Wesley VERNER, Appellee

From the County Court

, Kinney County, Texas

Trial Court No. 10182

- CR Honorable Tully Shahan , Jud ge Presiding



### O R D E R

On July 27, 2020, the State filed a motion for extension of time to file the State’s brief

until August 31, 2020 on the basis that the State was awaiting a supplemental clerk’s record. On August 17, 2020, this court ordered the trial court clerk to file th e supplemental clerk’s record by August 31, 2020. In light of this court’s prior order, the State’s motion for extension is GRANTED as follows: the State’s brief is due no later than September 30, 2020. Further requests for extension of time to file the St ate’s brief will be disfavored.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 21st day of August, 2020

.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, Clerk of Court
#### In the Matter of David Lou, Petitioner, v Stanley Katz, Respondent.

[632 NYS2d 218]

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (1) to prohibit the respondent, a Justice of the Supreme Court, Queens County, from directing Joel A. Brenner either to represent the petitioner or to obtain counsel for him in connection with a motion to resettle the record in *People v Lou,*Queens County Indictment No. 894/91 and (2) to direct the respondent to assign counsel for the petitioner in connection with the motion.

Motion by the respondent to dismiss the proceeding.

Upon the petition, the papers filed in support of the petition, and the papers filed in opposition thereto and in support of the motion, it is *506Ordered that the motion is granted; and it is further,

Adjudged that the petition is denied and the proceeding is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

"Because of its extraordinary nature, prohibition is available only where there is a clear legal right, and then only when a court—in cases where judicial authority is challenged—acts or threatens to act either without jurisdiction or in excess of its authorized powers” *(Matter of Holtzman v Goldman,*71 NY2d 564, 569; *accord, Matter of Rush v Mordue,*68 NY2d 348, 353). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the respondent acted in excess of his authorized powers when he found that, pursuant to the terms of the retainer agreement between the petitioner and his appellate counsel, Joel A. Brenner, Brenner is obligated to represent the petitioner at a resettlement hearing.

The extraordinary remedy of mandamus will lie only to compel the performance of a ministerial act and only when there exists a clear legal right to the relief sought *(see, Matter of Legal Aid Socy. v Scheinman,*53 NY2d 12, 16). The petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the assignment of counsel to represent him at the resettlement hearing. Sullivan, J. P., Thompson, Copertino, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

LORA E. LAVINE,

Plaintiff,

v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner,

Social Security Administration,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. C06-511-RSL-JPD

ORDER 

The Court, having reviewed plaintiff’s motion for award of attorney’s fees, expenses,

and costs, and defendant’s response to the motion, the Report and Recommendation of the

Honorable James P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge, and the remaining record, does

hereby find and ORDER:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation;

(2) Plaintiff’s attorney is awarded fees in the amount of $5,402.78, costs of

$161.76 per hour for the year of 2006, expenses in the amount of $27.28, and

taxable costs in the amount of $84.35.

(3) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to the parties and to

Magistrate Judge Donohue.

DATED this day of ______________, 200___.

_________________________

Robert S. Lasnik, Chief Judge

United States District Court

Case 2:06-cv-00511-RSL Document 24 Filed 12/13/06 Page 1 of 1