alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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

1

This Amended Order is issued to correct error in previous order indicating that some

defendants had not timely responded to Plaintiff’s interrogatories. (See Dkt. #46 at 2). 

2

Pursuant to Rules 26(a)(1)(E)(iii) and 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, no

conference of parties is required in this matter because Plaintiff, an inmate in state custody, brings

this action pro se. 

AMENDED ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

COMPEL PARTICIPATION IN DISCOVERY 

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

PATRICK L. GUILLLORY, )

)

Plaintiff, ) CASE NO. C06-747-MJP-MJB

)

v. )

)

SNOHOMISH COUNTY JAIL, et al., ) AMENDED ORDER1

) DENYING MOTION TO COMPEL

 Defendants. ) PARTICIPATION IN DISCOVERY

_________________________________ )

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for the court to compel

Defendants’ attorney to participate in discovery and be included in conferences2

. 

Having reviewed Plaintiff’s motion, Defendants’ response thereto, and the balance of the

record, the Court hereby finds and ORDERS:

(1) Plaintiff’s motion for order compelling participation in discovery (Dkt.

#32) is DENIED. When Plaintiff filed this motion on December 15, 2006, it was

premature in that his prior motion for request for admissions from defendants, which this
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

AMENDED ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

COMPEL PARTICIPATION IN DISCOVERY 

Page - 2

Court construed as interrogatories to parties, had just been served by mail to Defendants

on December 5, 2006 (see Dkt. #31), and, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 33(b)(3), the answers to

those interrogatories were due within 30 days after the service, i.e. by January 4, 2007. 

Defendants have timely responded to Plaintiff’s interrogatories. (See Dkt. #39, #41). 

(2) The Clerk shall send copies of this Order to Plaintiff, to all counsel of

record, and to the Honorable Marsha J. Pechman.

DATED this 10th day of January, 2007.

A 

MONICA J. BENTON

United States Magistrate Judge
No. 57780.

protests 156236-K, etc. (New York).

#### International Models, Inc., and Victory Shipping Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of model trains and parts, in chief value of metal, similar in all material respects to the merchandise the subject of *International Models, Inc.*and *Victory Shipping Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(31 Cust. Ct. 24, C. D. 1541), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
III

Calendar No. 336

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 201

To commemorate and acknowledge the dedication and sacrifice made by

the men and women who have lost their lives while serving as law

enforcement officers.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 30, 1998

Mr. KEMPTHORNE (for himself, Mr. ABRAHAM, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. BINGAMAN,

Mrs. BOXER, Mr. BROWNBACK, Mr. BRYAN, Mr. BURNS, Mr. CAMPBELL,

Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. COCHRAN, Ms. COLLINS, Mr. COVERDELL, Mr. CRAIG,

Mr. D’AMATO, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. DODD, Mr. DORGAN, Mr. DURBIN, Mr.

ENZI, Mr. FAIRCLOTH, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Mr. GLENN, Mr. GORTON, Mr.

GRAMM, Mr. GREGG, Mr. HAGEL, Mr. HELMS, Mr. HOLLINGS, Mrs.

HUTCHISON, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. INOUYE, Mr. JEFFORDS, Mr. JOHNSON,

Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr.

LOTT, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. MCCAIN, Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN, Mr. MOYNIHAN,

Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. NICKLES, Mr. REID, Mr. ROBB, Mr. ROCKEFELLER,

Mr. ROTH, Mr. SARBANES, Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. SHELBY, Mr. SMITH of

Oregon, Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire, Mr. THURMOND, Mr.

TORRICELLI, Mr. WARNER, Mr. WELLSTONE, Mr. BIDEN, and Mr.

KOHL) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

APRIL 2, 1998

Reported by Mr. HATCH, without amendment

RESOLUTION

To commemorate and acknowledge the dedication and sacrifice made by the men and women who have lost their

lives while serving as law enforcement officers.
2

•SRES 201 RS

Whereas the well-being of all citizens of this country is preserved and enhanced as a direct result of the vigilance

and dedication of law enforcement personnel;

Whereas more than 700,000 men and women, at great risk

to their personal safety, presently serve their fellow citizens in their capacity as guardians of the peace;

Whereas peace officers are the front line in preserving our

childrens’ right to receive an education in a crime-free

environment that is all too often threatened by the insidious fear caused by violence in schools;

Whereas 159 peace officers lost their lives in the performance

of their duty in 1997, and a total of 13,734 men and

women have now made that supreme sacrifice;

Whereas every year 1 in 9 officers is assaulted, 1 in 25 is

injured, and 1 in 4,400 is killed in the line of duty; and

Whereas, on May 15, 1998, more than 15,000 peace officers

are expected to gather in our nation’s Capital to join with

the families of their recently fallen comrades to honor

them and all others before them: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That May 15, 1998, is hereby designated

2 as ‘‘National Peace Officers Memorial Day’’ for the pur3 pose of recognizing all peace officers slain in the line of

4 duty. The President is authorized and requested to issue

5 a proclamation calling upon the people of the United

6 States to observe this day with the appropriate ceremonies

7 and respect.

Calendar No. 336

105TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. RES. 201

RESOLUTION

To commemorate and acknowledge the dedication

ment officers.have lost their lives while serving as law enforceand sacrifice made by the men and women who

APRIL 2, 1998

Reported without amendment
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

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION

TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE & PTM’s DUE DATE 1

CR06-5350RBL

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1331 Broadway, Ste. 400

Tacoma, Washington 98402

(253) 593-6710

JUDGE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

JOSE LUIS CAMPOS,

CARLOS ROMALLIS DANIELS, and

MIGUEL ANGEL PERALTA

ALONZO,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. CR06-5350RBL

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

DATE AND PRETRIAL MOTIONS

DUE DATE

Based on the stipulated motion of the parties to continue the trial date, and the

affidavit of defense counsel in support of the motion, the Court makes the following

findings of fact and conclusions of law:

1. The ends of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best

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

2. Proceeding to trial absent adequate time for the defense to prepare would

result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(B)(i). 

3. The defense needs additional time to explore issues of some complexity,

including all relevant issues and defenses applicable to the case, which would make it

unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings or for trial itself

within the time limits established by the Speedy Trial Act and currently set for this case. 

18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B(ii). 

Case 3:06-cr-05350-RBL Document 34 Filed 07/06/06 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

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION

TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE & PTM’s DUE DATE 2

CR06-5350RBL

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1331 Broadway, Ste. 400

Tacoma, Washington 98402

(253) 593-6710

4. Taking into account the exercise of due diligence, a continuance is necessary

to allow the defendant the reasonable time for effective preparation his defense. 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv). 

NOW, THEREFORE,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the trial date is continued from July 24, 2006 to

October 30, 2006, at 9:00 am. The resulting period of delay from July 24, 2006, to

October 30, 2006, is hereby excluded for speedy trial purposes under 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(8)(A) and (B).

Pre-trial motions are due no later than August 27, 2006.

Pretrial Motion Hearing, if needed, shall be on October 12, 2006, at 9:00 am.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 6th day of July, 2006. ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Presented By:

/s/ /s/ 

Russell V. Leonard Matthew H. Thomas 

Attorney for Mr. Campos Assistant United States Attorney

/s/_____________________________ /s/______________________________

Phil I. Brennan, Jr. John J. Kannin, IV

Attorney for Mr. Peralta Alonzo Attorney for Mr. Daniels

Case 3:06-cr-05350-RBL Document 34 Filed 07/06/06 Page 2 of 2
ORDER GRANTING UNITED STATES’ MOTION TO 

EXTEND TIME TO FILE A RESPONSE /

United States v. Rollness, CR06-041 RSL - 1

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101

(206) 553-7970

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

The Honorable Robert S. Lasnik

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

v.

RODNEY LEE ROLLNESS,

Defendant.

NO. CR06-041 RSL 

ORDER GRANTING UNITED STATES’ 

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE

RESPONSE

The Court, having reviewed the Motion of the United States to extend by fourteen

days the time to file a response to the defendant’s pro se motion for a reduction in sentence 

hereby states that IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. The United 

States may file its Response to Defendant’s Motion for Compassionate Release Pursuant 

to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A) on or before May 14, 2021, and the motion should be noted 

for May 21, 2021, unless the parties reach a different agreement regarding briefing. 

DATED this _____ day of ____________, 2021.

ROBERT S. LASNIK

United States District Court Judge

Presented by:

/s/ Helen J. Brunner

HELEN J. BRUNNER

Assistant United States Attorney

27th April __, 2021.

ROBERT S LASNIK

Case 2:06-cr-00041-RSL Document 1071 Filed 04/27/21 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 35.3

CERTIFICATION OF SERVICER PURSUANT TO ITEM 1123 OF
REGULATION AB

March 27,
2009

CIT Funding
Company, LLC
1 CIT Drive
Livingston, NJ 07039

Manufacturers
and Traders Trust Company
25 S. Charles Street, 16th Floor
Baltimore, Maryland 21201Attn.: Corporate Trust Services

M&T Trust
Company of Delaware
1220 N. Market Street, Suit 200
Wilmington, Delaware 19801

| |     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     | 
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
| | Re: | Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as
 of April 1, 2008,
 among CIT Equipment Collateral 2008-VT1, as Trust, CIT
 Funding Company, LLC, as Depositor, and CIT Financial USA,Inc., in its individual capacity and as Servicer (the Agreement). | 

I,
Nicholas Michael Small, Assistant Controller of CIT Technology Financing
Services, Inc. (the Sub-Servicer), hereby certify that:

A
review of the activities of the Sub-Servicer during the period from May 14,
2008 through December 31, 2008 (the Reporting Period) and of the performance
of the Sub-Servicer under the Agreement has been made under my supervision; and

To
the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Sub-Servicer has fulfilled
its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the
Reporting Period, except as described in Appendix B to the
Sub-Servicers Report on Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Servicing
Criteria Pursuant to Item 1122 of Regulation AB.

| |                                                           |                                 | 
| | --------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------- | 
| | CIT Technology Financing Services, Inc.,
 as Sub-Servicer |                                
| |                                                           |                                 | 
| | By:                                                       | /s/
 Nicholas Michael Small     | 
| |                                                           |                                 | 
| |                                                           | Name:  Nicholas
 Michael Small  | 
| |                                                           | Title:    Assistant
 Controller | 

-58-

---
[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: Mineralresources of the Citico Creek wilderness study area, Monroe Company, Tennessee**
 
Report | Plates: 0102
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.3:1552
Item Number:0620 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000962234
 
August 23, 2018
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 709 

Recognizing and honoring the 50th anniversary of the dedication of the 

Sam Rayburn Library and Museum on October 9, 2007, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 3, 2007 

Mr. HALL of Texas submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 

the Committee on Education and Labor 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing and honoring the 50th anniversary of the dedication of the Sam Rayburn Library and Museum on October 9, 2007, and for other purposes. 

Whereas Samuel Taliaferro Rayburn, affectionately known as 

‘‘Mr. Sam’’, held the position of Speaker of the House of 

Representatives for a record seventeen and a half years; 

and 

Whereas the legendary former Speaker of the House served 

twenty-four consecutive terms as United States Representative of the Fourth District of Texas, until his 

death in 1961: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives recog2 nizes and honors the 50th anniversary of the dedication 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
2 

•HRES 709 IH 

1 of the Sam Rayburn Library and Museum on October 9, 

2 2007, as well as completion of phase one of the museum 

3 restoration program, and also recognizes the many sup4 porters and contributors whose efforts have helped main5 tain and improve the Library and Museum. 

Æ 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMBILLS
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 17, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 134956 & (16) Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, WILLIE MCGUIRE, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 134956 COA: 279309 Wayne CC: 06-628142-NI THE CITY OF DEARBORN and DANIEL MORSE, Defendants-Appellants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion fo r immediate consideration is GRANTED. The application for leave to a ppeal the August 27, 2007 ord er of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not p ersuaded that the question presented should now be reviewe d by this Court.

d1017 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 17, 2007

Clerk
#### Chidi N. ANUNKA, Appellant, v. Joan CAMPBELL; Minneapolis City Council, Appellees.

No. 01-1192.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted June 28, 2001.

Decided July 5, 2001.

Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Chidi N. Anunka appeals from the district court’s1 dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. *476§ 1983 action as time-barred. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs, we agree that the complaint was filed after the expiration of the applicable six-year limitations period, *see Owens v. Okure,*488 U.S. 235, 249-50, 109 S.Ct. 573, 102 L.Ed.2d 594 (1989); *Berg v. Groschen,*437 N.W.2d 75, 77 (Minn.Ct.App.1989), and that the circumstances did not justify equitable tolling, *see Wilson v. Garcia,*471 U.S. 261, 269, 105 S.Ct. 1938, 85 L.Ed.2d 254 (1985); *Ochs v. Streater, Inc.,*568 N.W.2d 858, 860 (Minn.Ct.App.1997). Accordingly, we affirm. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The HONORABLE JOHN R. TUNHEIM, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the HONORABLE FRANKLIN L. NOEL, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.
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

DETENTION ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W. D. OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff,

v.

EDDY RODRIGUEZ-SANTIAGO,

 Defendant.

Case No. 06-5067M

DETENTION ORDER

THE COURT, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3142, finds that no condition or combination

of conditions which defendant can meet will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and/or the safety of any

other person and the community.

This finding is based on 1) the nature and circumstances of the offense(s) charged, including whether the offense is a

crime of violence or involves a narcotic drug; 2) the weight of the evidence against the person; 3) the history and characteristics of

the person including those set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)(3)(A)(B); and 4) the nature and seriousness of the danger release would

impose to any person or the community.

Findings of Fact/ Statement of Reasons for Detention

Presumptive Reasons/Unrebutted:

 ( ) Conviction of a Federal offense involving a crime of violence. 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(A)

 ( ) Potential maximum sentence of life imprisonment or death. 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(B)

 (X) Potential maximum sentence of 10+ years as prescribed in the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.§801 et seq.), the

Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C.§951 et seq.) Or the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (46

U.S.C. App. 1901 et seq.)

 ( ) Convictions of two or more offenses described in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(1) of two or more

State or local offenses that would have been offenses described in said subparagraphs if a circumstance giving rise to

Federal jurisdiction had existed, or a combination of such offenses.

Safety Reasons:

 ( ) Defendant is currently on probation/supervision resulting from a prior offense.

 ( ) Defendant was on bond on other charges at time of alleged occurrences herein.

 (X) Defendant’s prior criminal history.

Flight Risk/Appearance Reasons:

 ( ) Defendant’s lack of sufficient ties to the community.

 (X) Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer.

 ( ) Detainer(s)/Warrant(s) from other jurisdictions.

 (X) Failures to appear for past court proceedings.

 ( ) Past conviction for escape.

Other:

 (X) Defendant waived detention hearing.

 

Order of Detention

< The defendant shall be committed to the custody of the Attorney General for confinement in a corrections facility

separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal.

< The defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with counsel.

< The defendant shall on order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the Government, be delivered

to a United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding.

 April 3, 2006.

___s/ Karen L. Strombom______________

Karen L Strombom, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cr-05265-RBL Document 15 Filed 04/03/06 Page 1 of 1
# C_2018142EN.01004601.xml

| 23.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 142/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/46

---

Judgment of the General Court of 8 March 2018 — Cinkciarz.pl v EUIPO (€$)

(Case T-665/16) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Application for EU figurative mark €$ - Absolute grounds for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Obligation to state reasons - Article 65 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 72 of Regulation 2017/1001)))

(2018/C 142/60)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Cinkciarz.pl sp. z o.o. (Zielona Góra, Poland) (represented by: E Skrzydło-Tefelska and K. Gajek, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 July 2016 (Case R 2086/2015-5), concerning an application for registration of the sign €$ as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 July 2016 (Case R 2086/2015-5); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 14 July 2016 (Case R 2086/2015-5);

| 2. | Orders EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders EUIPO to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 402, 31.10.2016.

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 ORDER- 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

DE VONNE C. HOUSTON,

Petitioner,

v.

MAGGIE MILLER-STOUT,

Respondent.

Case No. C06-5283RJB

 ORDER GRANTING

RESPONDENT AN 

EXTENSION OF TIME 

This 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition has been assigned to the undersigned Magistrate Judge.

Before the court is Respondent’s motion for an extension of time to file an answer. In the

supporting documentation counsel explains that case load and illness have prevented meeting the 45

day time frame (Dkt. # 13). Petitioner opposes the extension of time (Dkt. # 14). Respondent has

replied and set forth the time frame for when she received documents and what her case load has

been. 

Respondent has shown good cause for an extension of time. The motion is GRANTED. 

Respondent will have until November 3rd, 2006 to file an answer.

The clerk is directed to send copies of this order to petitioner and counsel for respondent. And

to note the November 3rd, 2006 due date.

DATED this 19th, day of October, 2006.

/S/ J. Kelley Arnold

J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:06-cv-05283-RJB Document 18-2 Filed 10/19/06 Page 1 of 1