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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK PAYNE,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1585 MCE KJM P

vs.

TROY BRIMHALL, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiff

seeks relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On June 14, 2006, the court ordered the United States Marshal to serve the

complaint on six defendants. Process directed to defendants Sogge and D. Williams was

returned unserved. Plaintiff must provide additional information to serve these defendants. 

Plaintiff shall promptly seek such information through discovery, the California Public Records

Act, Calif. Gov’t. Code § 6250, et seq., or other means available to plaintiff. If access to the

required information is denied or unreasonably delayed, plaintiff may seek judicial intervention.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send to plaintiff two USM-285 forms,

along with an instruction sheet and a copy of the amended complaint filed August 23, 2005;

Case 2:04-cv-01585-MCE -KJM Document 25 Filed 10/03/06 Page 1 of 3
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

2

2. Within sixty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall complete and

submit the attached Notice of Submission of Documents to the court, with the following

documents:

a. Two completed USM-285 forms, one each for defendants Sogge and D.

Williams; and 

b. Three copies of the endorsed amended complaint filed August 23,

2005;

or show good cause why he cannot provide such information.

DATED: October 2, 2006.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1/mp

payn1585.8e

Case 2:04-cv-01585-MCE -KJM Document 25 Filed 10/03/06 Page 2 of 3
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK PAYNE, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1585 MCE KJM P

vs.

TROY BRIMHALL, et al., NOTICE OF SUBMISSION

Defendants. OF DOCUMENTS

 /

Plaintiff hereby submits the following documents in compliance with the court's

order filed :

 2 completed USM-285 forms

 3 copies of the August 23, 2005 

 Amended Complaint

DATED: 

 

Plaintiff

Case 2:04-cv-01585-MCE -KJM Document 25 Filed 10/03/06 Page 3 of 3
# EUR-Lex - 52007BP0126(01) - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52007BP0126(01)

**1. European Parliament decision of 24 April 2007 on the discharge for the implementation of the budget of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control for the financial year 2005 (C6-0400/2006 - 2006/2167(DEC)) **

*
Official Journal 074 E , 20/03/2008 P. 0261 - 0262 *

1.

European Parliament decision of 24 April 2007 on the discharge for the implementation of the budget of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control for the financial year 2005 (C6-0400/2006 — 2006/2167(DEC))

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the final annual accounts of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control for the financial year 2005 [1],

- having regard to the Court of Auditors' report on the final annual accounts of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control for the financial year 2005, together with the Centre's replies [2],

- having regard to the Council's recommendation of 27 February 2007 (5711/2007 — C6-0080/2007),

- having regard to the EC Treaty, and in particular Article 276 thereof,

- having regard to Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities [3], and in particular Article 185 thereof,

- having regard to Regulation (EC) No 851/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 establishing a European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control [4], and in particular Article 23 thereof,

- having regard to Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 [5], and in particular Article 94 thereof,

- having regard to Rule 71 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the Report of the Committee on Budgetary Control and the opinion of the Committee for Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A6-0119/2007),

1. Grants the executive director of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control discharge for the implementation of the Centre's budget for the financial year 2005;

2. Sets out its observations in the resolution below;

3. Instructs its President to forward this decision and the resolution that forms an integral part of it to the executive director of European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors, and to arrange for their publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (L series).

[1] OJ C 266, 31.10.2006, p. 31.

[2] OJ C 312, 19.12.2006, p. 54.

[3] OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1995/2006 (OJ L 390, 30.12.2006, p. 1).

[4] OJ L OJ L 142, 30.4.2004, p. 1.

[5] OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p. 72.

--------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of OpenTV Corp.

As of December 31, 2007

A table of the direct and indirect subsidiaries of OpenTV Corp. is set forth below, indicating as to each the state or jurisdiction of organization and
the names under which such subsidiaries do business. Subsidiaries not included in the table are inactive or, considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, would not constitute a significant subsidiary.



|                                               |  |                             
|---------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------
|Name of the Subsidiary                         |  | Jurisdiction of Organization
|ACTV, Inc.                                     |  | United States (Delaware)    
|ACTV Entertainment, Inc.                       |  | United States (New York)    
|Advision Systems, LLC                          |  | United States (Delaware)    
|Digital Adco, Inc.                             |  | United States (Delaware)    
|HyperTV Networks, Inc.                         |  | United States (Delaware)    
|Intellocity USA, Inc.                          |  | United States (Delaware)    
|Media Online Services, Inc.                    |  | United States (Delaware)    
|OpenTV (Israel) Ltd.                           |  | Israel                      
|OpenPlay (BVI) Ltd.                            |  | British Virgin Islands      
|OpenTV Advertising Holdings, Inc.              |  | United States (Delaware)    
|OpenTV GmbH                                    |  | Switzerland                 
|OpenTV Japan KK                                |  | Japan                       
|OpenTV Australia Pty Ltd                       |  | Australia (New South Wales) 
|OpenTV (Cayman) Digital Solutions              |  | Cayman Islands              
|OpenTV Europe S.A.S                            |  | France                      
|OpenTV Holding N.V.                            |  | Netherlands Antilles        
|OpenTV Holdings B.V.                           |  | The Netherlands             
|OpenTV, Inc.                                   |  | United States (Delaware)    
|OpenTV Interactive Software (Beijing) Co. Ltd. |  | China                       
|OpenTV UK Limited                              |  | United Kingdom              
|OpenTV US Holdings, Inc.                       |  | United States (Delaware)    
|OpenTV US Investments, Inc.                    |  | United States (Delaware)    
|Spyglass Integration, Inc.                     |  | United States (Delaware)    
|Wink Communications, Inc.                      |  | United States (Delaware)
II 

Calendar No. 60 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 467 

[Report No. 118–22] 

To modify the age requirement for the Student Incentive Payment Program 

of the State maritime academies. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 16, 2023 

Mr. PETERS (for himself, Mr. YOUNG, Mr. CRUZ, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mr. 

BRAUN, Ms. BALDWIN, and Mr. MARKEY) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation 

MAY 10, 2023 

Reported by Ms. CANTWELL, with an amendment 

[Insert the part printed in italic] 

A BILL 

To modify the age requirement for the Student Incentive 

Payment Program of the State maritime academies. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 467 RS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Changing Age-Deter3 mined Eligibility To Student Incentive Payments Act’’ or 

4 the ‘‘CADETS Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. AGE REQUIREMENT FOR THE STUDENT INCENTIVE 

6 PAYMENT PROGRAM OF THE STATE MARI7 TIME ACADEMIES. 

8 Section 51509 of title 46, United States Code, is 

9 amended by adding at the end the following: 

10 ‘‘(i) AGE REQUIREMENT.—The Secretary may make 

11 an agreement under this section only with a qualified stu12 dent who will meet the age requirement for enlistment or 

13 commission in the Navy Reserve at the time of graduation 

14 from the academy.’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
Calendar No. 60 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 467 

[Report No. 118–22] 

A BILL 

To modify the age requirement for the Student Inacademies. centive Payment Program of the State maritime 

MAY 10, 2023 

Reported with an amendment 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
(Reap. Dec. 8679)

Entry No. W-07545.

#### New York Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided October 10, 1956)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

MollisoN, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the export value of the merchandise at the time of exportation to the United States covered by the Appeal to Reappraisement enumerated above, with the exception of 30 cases of merchandise Nos. 767/796 inclusive, purchased from the Ono Rubber KK, Tokyo, at which time such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal market of the country from which exported in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade for export to the United States including costs of containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise ready for shipment to the United States was the appraised value less additions made to meet the advances by the Appraiser in similar cases covering the n on-dutiable so-called (F. O. B.) charges for inland freight, insurance premium, storage, hauling and lighterage added by the importer on entry.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no higher foreign value for merchandise such or similar to the merchandise herein at the time of exportation thereof.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the Appeal to Reap-praisement enumerated above may be submitted for decision on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find tbe export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, except the 30 cases of merchandise Nos. 767/796, inclusive, purchased from the Ono Rubber KK, Tokyo, and that such values were the appraised values, less additions made to meet the advances by the appraiser in similar cases covering the nondutiable so-called (f. o. b.) charges for inland freight, insurance premium, storage, hauling, and lighterage, added by the importer on entry.

Insofar as the appeal relates to the 30 cases of merchandise Nos. 767/796, inclusive, purchased from the Ono Rubber KK, Tokyo, it is hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
### LINE AND PIPING SYMBOL 

### IDENTIFICATION I.**~** DENOTES**~ECHANICAL** LIN K AtL 

### 2.**~~~~** DENOTES FLE XIB LE CONNEC T IONS 

### 3.--

- - --DENOTES ELECTRICAL SIGNAL 4. ----DENOT ES INSTRUMENT LINE

# l~**@~**

# ~ H

# ~~~"',_'_"_~"'."',1-~-**, _v..,.~,** **'f- .,....L....L-'-...J..---fk).----l---....L..--11-....L..-=:::..:.:::..=..:::::;ce:r--_,oU**  1-r

__ _:'.:..v::.:oTHERS:.:::::.._

___

# ---lr--~--.-...'----.. ARNQ**~:** ::**~IW** IIIR)**;20~¢J?Y~~)** 

### 5
. DENOTES PIPING/DUCTING LINE 

### 6. 

# <P DENOTES ELECTRICAL INTERL OCK

1 Blll'M 1l:l IJN(':f (UJm HEH WILl£) JO PS!Ol 

# ,.,**-~~** :>1' ..

c.**~"'** 480'1'/JI'!I/!OKZ**I~** PSIG i30nJ(SCF(l.O'IDIOTliAI.LIE)

2# Fl£L m 22..!1U$"'-''**Ul,!iiJOBT\J~**

GENERAL NOTES : 

# "'

II/2'P 

# 0 i



## ,, , 

# 0 i 

# ,.,

1. ALL**CC~PONENTS DUCTING**  PRO'<IDED BY OTHERS(UTAC) UNLESS OTIHER'MSE SPECIFIED. 2. PT603 AND P T604 ARE EXISTING AND \IU BE RELOCATED. 

### 3. PT101, P l501 AND P1101 ARE EXIS T IN G AND 'MLL BE RELOCAnED 4. FOR MANUFACTURING SCOPE SEE REFERENCE DRAWING C1110-A-GA-01.**l** 1t'' 

# "' (lf.-ml) 

# ,.,

, 

# ..

# '¥r:~·**-=-==----N---~--l~~:lftll!llllna:** •. < 

# '"""' r··- - ·- ·-**~** L.._
- ,_ .. _ J

I**~J..I!:.tv'**



# FOR IN FORM ATION ONLY Notes:

- Va lve Train burner S )".'tem designed to FM.

- Electrical erdosures to be NEMA 4, indoor

inst a ll at ion.

- A ltitude 1400 FASL

- Ambient Temperature: 32 to 104'f

- Customer to pipe vents to 

### a safe locoti on .

- CONTROLS 115V / I PH / 60 HZ MOTORS 460V/3 PH / 60 HZ



### lllJEiiE!l. 8'1-ll'.LL VALVE**BX-KlN~ KlN** **~SFOOMER DF-ST~NER**  FN-Fm FO-ORilCE FCV -FL OW CWTROL VALVE FZV -Siffl'l' SHIJT Off VALVE GSC-POSITKlN S'MTCH CLJJSED GSO-POSITION S\\ITCH OP£N GSI..- POS**~KIN** S\I!TCH LCI/1 hV-HAND VALVE M-MOTOO M A -AC !U'.TOR PCV -PRES S URE REGl.UffiR**P~-DFFER'L** PRES. GAIXE**~-PRESSURE** I:Al):;[ PSH
- PRE S. S'MTCH**H~H** PSL -PR£5. S\\ITCH LOW SP-SPECI'.L ITEM(HOSE, EX P. JJI<TS)

MAX. Heat Release Design

. Heat Release Location 180 

### x 10' BTU / hr 180 X 10'BTU/hr Indoors A ltitude Pilot Type Pilot Fuel 

### Bill.



## #2 FUEL 

## m 1400 FASL AECOM E TR IC**Pre-~ix** Natural Gas

LO'MER HEA T ING VALUE 18 500 BTU / LB M AX IMUM FLOW RATE 

### 1374 USGPH NA

TURAL GAS LO'MER HEAT VA LUE 930 BTU / SCF M AX IMUM FLOW RATE 322 6 SCFM P UL VERIZED COAL LO'MER HEAT VA LUE 14300 BTU / SCF M AXI MUM FLOW RATE 12587 LBS / Hr

UPOIITEO AS PER W.MENTS AN D CERTiffD NH 00 TI-fct-1

RESERVED. 'NY REPROOJCnDN DR**MOOF~ATKJN** OF TH£ OCSIGN CR**DRA~NG** IS P R<HBITED )\qlHQUT EX PLI D T IIRITTEN**C~SENT** Of**'AECDME~C** CORPDR,TIDN'. 

### AEcoMIEIRIC**CO•PORA~** 

# _..,_**fP.&Ohlll"&l.......,loi~O.riiii.AeZI"t** KILN BURNER SIZE 180 PROCESS 

### & INSTRUMENTS DIAGRAM QIFFS**Tl'D** T

AC ONITE**F~RLANE** PlANT
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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH ABDULLAH, CIV. S-04-1735-DFL-DAD

 

Plaintiff, 

v. ORDER RE DISPOSITION AFTER

 NOTIFICATION OF SETTLEMENT

WEDGEWOOD APARTMENTS; 

1201 FULTON INVESTORS; 

LAUGHTON PROPERTIES, INC.

and DOES 1 through 10, 

inclusive, 

Defendants. 

 /

The court has been advised by Reuben D. Nathan, Esq., that

this action has been settled. Therefore, it is not necessary

that the action remain upon the court's active calendar. 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 

1. That counsel file settlement/dismissal documents, in

accordance with the provisions of Local Rule 16-160, no later

Case 2:04-cv-01735-DFL-DAD Document 10 Filed 05/16/05 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

2

than June 27, 2005, and,

2. That all hearing dates previously set in this matter

are vacated. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: 5/13/2005

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01735-DFL-DAD Document 10 Filed 05/16/05 Page 2 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

VICTOR S. HALTOM

Attorney at Law

State Bar No. 155157

428 J Street, Suite 350

Sacramento, CA 95814

Telephone: (916) 444-8663

Facsimile: 444-1546

e-mail: vshjah@aol.com

Attorney for Petitioner

KEVIN B. JOHNSON

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

IN AND FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEVIN B. JOHNSON,

Petitioner, CIV-S-04-0892 DFL DAD P

vs. ORDER

JIM HAMLET, Warden, et al.,

Respondents.

 /

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s August 27, 2005 application for a fourth

enlargement of time is granted. On or before September 22, 2005, petitioner shall file either a

statement that he will stand on his existing petition and supplemental points and authorities or a

motion for leave to amend accompanied by a proposed amended petition containing exhausted

claims only and, if appropriate, a motion for a stay pending exhaustion of additional claims.

DATED: August 29, 2005.

/john0892.ext4

Case 2:04-cv-00892-MCE -DAD Document 34 Filed 08/30/05 Page 1 of 1
No. 44034.

#### Protest 687279-G of Samuel S. Perry (Portland, Oreg.).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is similar to that the subject of *United States*v. *Penn*(27 C. C. P. A. 46, C. A. D. 93). The claim at 90 percent under paragraph 1529 (a) was therefore sustained.
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

Stipulation for Discovery Extension - 1 - Civil No. 04-CV-2494 

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

RICHARD A. LATTERELL

Trial Attorney, Tax Division

United States Department of Justice

P.O. Box 683, Ben Franklin Station

Washington, DC 20044-0683

Telephone: (202) 307-6422

Facsimile: (202) 307-0054

Attorneys for the United States of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA AT SACRAMENTO

CAL FRUIT INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

JEANNE SPAICH; INTERNAL

REVENUE SERVICE; and DOES 1-20, 

 Defendants.

Civil No. 04-CV-2494 FCD-KJM 

STIPULATION FOR THIRTY-DAY

EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY PERIOD

“MODIFIED”

Plaintiff Cal Fruit International, Inc., defendant Jeanne Spaich, and defendant the United States of

America, on behalf of the Internal Revenue Service, by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby

stipulate to and jointly move the Court for a thirty-day extension of the discovery period, until November

30, 2005. In support thereof, the parties state as follows:

 1. The parties do not anticipate this extension will affect the other pretrial deadlines 

set by this Court.

2. This extension is made to allow the parties to conduct depositions and fully explore any 

possibility of settlement before trial.

//

//

Case 2:04-cv-02494-FCD-KJM Document 21 Filed 10/14/05 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

Stipulation for Discovery Extension - 2 - Civil No. 04-CV-2494 

Respectfully submitted this 13 day of October, 2005. th

Respectfully Submitted,

 /s/ Brian C. Hamman 

BRIAN C. HAMMAN, ESQ.

HARRIS, SANFORD & HAMMAN

660 Ohio Street

P.O. Box 908

Gridley, CA 95948

(530) 846-5691

Attorney for plaintiff

 /s/ R. Todd Luoma 

R. TODD LUOMA

LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD TODD LUOMA

3600 American River Drive, Suite 135

Sacramento, CA 95864

(916) 971-2440

Attorney for Jeanne Spaich

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

 /s/ Richard A. Latterell 

RICHARD A. LATTERELL

Trial Attorney, Tax Division

United States Department of Justice

P.O. Box 683, Ben Franklin Station

Washington, DC 20044-0683

Telephone: (202) 307-6422

Facsimile: (202) 307-0054

Attorneys for the United States

The court finds good cause exists and the discovery deadline is extended to November 30, 2005. 

However, in light of this extension the court also extends the last date for hearing of dispositive motions

to January 23, 2006. All other dates as set in the Status Order shall remain in effect. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated this 14 day of October, 2005. th

/s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

HONORABLE FRANK C. DAMRELL JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02494-FCD-KJM Document 21 Filed 10/14/05 Page 2 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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HOANG MONG LE,

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-2522 LKK DAD P

vs.

JOHN ASHCROFT, et al.,

Respondents. ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

 /

Petitioner has filed an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2241. On February 28, 2005, respondents filed a motion to dismiss. Petitioner has not

filed an opposition to the motion although the court granted petitioner an extension of time on

April 1, 2005. Local Rule 78-230(m) provides in part: “Failure of the responding party to file

written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any

opposition to the granting of the motion . . . .” Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that petitioner show cause, within twenty days, why respondents’ February 28, 2005

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02522-LKK -DAD Document 15 Filed 05/11/05 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

2

motion to dismiss should not be granted. Petitioner’s failure to respond to this order will result

in a recommendation that the motion to dismiss be granted. 

DATED: May 11, 2005.

DAD:4

le2522.osc2

Case 2:04-cv-02522-LKK -DAD Document 15 Filed 05/11/05 Page 2 of 2