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

CCI 

~ . . . 

·~- --~·F -ID.; i.6·,;o·7'f;·---:._-:~~-~=·:_ ~-~~i-:-..:4.i""= 

stmae'la Snoloaun (A) Cow ar kick.Ion l.rttel' ot 16 Ootobor 1951+ 

tQ I llr k lopr Hnee.u 

CIO, Qg ... 921..0 •1'1' Department W...Mneton 25, fl* c. 

l. l'.t 1• wae•t.a tbat a rep~ IN'bate.nt.1allt .. toll.ova 

vou.l4 w u roeapiaive IU34 u 41.acreet u oucu.tancea perm.tt1 

"Yow.- lette1• ot a6 October 1$54 mMI que1ticna 1tl & 

tieU. ot IUCh •.Q91t1Yity that I found it 4e•1ra'ble to ~r cmar ~ •ttor to::: 1omt.t ts.. .. 

Tlaa \leat. that l aaD 4Q at thi• \1- i• t9 X'Wter 1'QU "° .. JM\ter 4ate4 rr 8eptembor 1944 Vh1ch General Hanb&U 

wrote to Qovemar lllwy aD4 Which a DOV 1n the pUbllc 

40M1P •1ne9 it &ppll'&l'• in the Report ot the J'oint C~aaioral luv•lt1f''t1on ot \be harl lfubor Atta.ck. la.rt '' ,,. U31 ... 1133. . 

•· 1*" or&tr to MY• '* 1A tiGd.1.Dg tba letter t.o Vhioh 

nterew:e 1• -.., I 1actloae & Jbotocop,y ot it, ade traa a t)tpoMript cow ill 11(,Y Olm t1l••· x .-ntton tb9 l&tte:r phraM 'beca.ueo 

the toot.note -.ii;e4 lq an utel·iU. on NO 1'. i• 111 ow obaervt.tion. 

U ¥OU ahould &t<i1de to 1Dcl.Ude a cow ot the Maraba.U·Devoy latter 

in the at\IWl" to lr1oU<>n, 'the .. teriak lt.¥1d the footnote tlhoul.4, or ~. ,. deleted. 

S· X boJ,"19 tbe torqo~ •uaeat.ion vill .. \>le ;rou a.n4 

lroteaaor Mo:r1ton t.o Uapon.ot thia 4al!este •tter in an 

appropriate -.xmer. 1'lMJ 161.rahall-Deve)* i.tter apealrJI Y'Olumea. 

XDclt 

a/• M/Rs Proposed answer to Mt·. Erickaon regarding 

quaationa .. ked by hinl in a letter addressed 

to Dr. toori•on, Harvard. Univeraity, regarding .Aq contents ot books written by Dr. Morieon. 

C/S 

S/ASST (Mr. Fr~:iJ.~-~ _ 8 · . cDOni1!7fj8AFJM4§3/10Dsc54/ can 

·I
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   Exhibit 23.3
                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 
The Board of Directors
Accipiter, Inc.:
 
We consent to the inclusion of our report on Accipiter, Inc. dated March 26,
1998 in the prospectus constituting part of this Registration Statement on
Form S-1 of Engage Technologies, Inc. and to the reference to our firm under
the heading "Experts" in the prospectus.
 
 
/s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
 
Raleigh, North Carolina
May 7, 1999
#### WILLIAM LEE, ADMINISTRATOR OF JOHN HARRIS vs. BRYANT GAUSE.

June 1843

Upon the suggestion of the death of a party, which is denied, the court will decide the question on affidavits.

In this case, an opinion in favor of the plaintiff was delivered by the court at June Term 1842, but no judgment was entered for want of the pleadings. At December Term 1842, a suggestion was entered on the record that the plaintiff had died before June Term 1842: and this suggestion was denied on the record. At this Term, (June 1843,) *Strange*for the defendants produced affidavits proving the truth of the suggestion, and there being no counter-affidavits,

Per Curiam.

Let the cause be-entered Abated..
----

| Dated: | May 13, 2010 |   |                               |
|--------|--------------|--------|------------------------------------|
|   |         |   |                               |
|   |         |   | /s/ Peter G. Dornau                |
|   |         |   | Peter G. Dornau                    |
|   |         |   | Chairman of the Board of Directors |
|   |         |   | and Chief Executive Officer        |
|   |         |   |                               |
|   |         |   | /s/ Jeffrey S. Barocas             |
|   |         |   | Jeffrey S. Barocas                 |
|   |         |   | Chief Financial Officer            |

----
RELEASE1JULY2015 . 4) • ' ; -(4*..-* . . *ill EVEL11111.SYSTEM MY ....... Epopq 

•'.uililil. 

7{-0 NATIONAL PHOTOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATION CENTER 

BYE 50299/67 

3 July 1947 

Copy 1 

Major General James T. Stewart 

Department of the Air Force 

Office of the Secretary 

Vice Director, MOL Program 

Dear Jim, 

It was good of you and Russ Berg to take the time to hear 

John Cain and me out following John's and my recent visit to 

Rochester and Philadelphia for a fill-in on the status of DOR 

As we told you, we returned from the visit concerned by the 

implications for the Center in a decision to move ahead without 

a multiple recovery system for incremental acquisitions of the 

take. This will, of course, mean a single delivery of sizeable 

quantities of film, each frame.of which is likely to be loaded 

with significant intelligence information. Obviously, the Center 

would prefer to receive smaller batches of take more frequently 

in order to spread the workload and to speed the exploitation 

process. 

Though not of direct concern to the Center and its mission, 

we were also interested in the decision to move ahead without an 

on-board readout and reporting system& A report from an astronaut 

purporting to see evidence, say, of preparations to initiate 

hostilities would be lacking in immediate imagery verification and 

would present severe problems to our policy-makers. 

We are aware, of course, that technical issues force trade-offs . 

in the development of systems components and we do not intend to 

jeopardize mission fulfillment with a series' of unilateral demands. 

We will, however, present our views to COMIREX for a fuller 

expression of community judgment. You mentioned plans for an early 

MOL briefing of COMIREX by your office. We will wait until after 

that occasion to tell COMIREX of our views. 

Best regards, 

c-57-71 

E. H. Knoche • 

Executive Director 

es. n eneral Russell Baru PP"? 

NRO APPROVED FOR 

ICre'77711
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Annual Report of RailAmerica, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, William G. Pagonis,
Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. /s/ William G. Pagonis
William G. Pagonis
Principal Executive Officer
 Date: March 15, 2004 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to RailAmerica, Inc. and will be retained by RailAmerica, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# CE2004084EN.01042802.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/428 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/428

---

(2004/C 84 E/0499)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0563/04

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission

(26 February 2004)

Subject:   Implementation of the Nitrates Directive in Ireland

Subject:

The Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC (1)), was adopted by the Council on 12 December 1991 and should have been implemented in full by all Member States by 1995 at the latest.

1

What action has the Commission taken, or is it considering taking, to ensure that Ireland complies in full with its commitments under this Directive?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-0561/04 and E-0563/04

given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 2004)

(22 March 2004)

In response to Written Question E-561/04, the Commission confirms that Ireland has not negotiated a derogation from Council Directive 91/676/EEC.

In response to Written Question E-563/04, the Commission confirms that it has taken legal proceedings in the Court of Justice against Ireland for non-compliance with the requirements of Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources.

---

(1)  OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1.

1

---
#### IN RE HARTUNG.

*December 20, 1897.*

*Supreme court: Original jurisdictibn: Enjoining public nuisance.*

A mere public nuisance, even though an aggravated one, does not affect the sovereignty, franchises, or prerogatives of the state, or the liberties of its people, so as to warrant the supreme court in entertaining an original action for an injunction.

ApplioatioN for leave to bring an action in the name of the state:

*Application denied.*

*AT. 8. Murphey,*for the motion.

*O. H.*Hamilton, *contra.*

The application was denied December 20, 1897, and the following opinion was filed January 11, 1898:

Winslow, J.

This is an application for leave to bring an original action in this court in the name of the state for the purpose of obtaining a perpetual injunction. The application was first made to the attorney general, and, upon his-refusal, to this court.

The petitioner is the chairman of the town board of the town of Wauwatosa, and his proposed complaint and accompanying affidavits tend to show that the city of *Milwaukee*is depositing its garbage to the amount of many loads daily upon the surface of certain parcels of land in the town of Wauwatosa, and leaving the same uncovered, and that the same constitutes a great and intolerable nuisance and menace to the health of the people of the neighborhood, and that the city threatens and intends to continue making such deposits; and, further, that there is no adequate remedy by private action, because the city threatens that, if enjoined from depositing the same in one locality, it will deposit the same upon other parcels of land in the town with whose *141owners it has made contracts for that purpose. Notice of the application was given to the city attorney of Milwaukee, and upon the hearing the motion was denied, for-reasons now to be briefly given.

The limits of the jurisdiction of this court to entertain an •original action for an injunction are well defined, and have been defined ever since the exhaustive discussions of the •question by Chief Justice EyaN in the cases of *Attorney General v. Railway Cos.*35 Wis. 425, and *Attorney General v. Eau*Claire, 37 Wis. 400-442. In the latter case it was said that, to put in motion the original jurisdiction of this court, the question should be one *“*affecting the sovereignty of the state, its franchises or prerogatives, or the liberties of its people.” A mere public nuisance, even though an aggravated one, cannot.reasonably be said to affect the sovereignty, franchises, or prerogatives of the state, or the liberties of its people. *State v. Si. Croix Boom Corp.*60 Wis. 565. The courts of original jurisdiction are open for the redress of such wrongs, and the prevention of them when threatened, and it must be presumed that the remedies so afforded are .ample.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Gregory S. Furness, Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Delphax Technologies
Inc. (the Company), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| | (1) | the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                         |  |     |  |                                                    
|------------------------ |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|Dated: February 14, 2007 |  | By: |  | /s/ Gregory S. Furness                             
|                         |  |     |  | Gregory S. Furness                                 
|                         |  |     |  | Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1583 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1583

    To authorize the expansion of an existing hydroelectric project.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 16, 2015

 Ms. Murkowski introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To authorize the expansion of an existing hydroelectric project.

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

SECTION 1. KODIAK ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION UPPER HIDDEN BASIN DIVERSION 
              AUTHORIZATION.

    (a) In General.--The special-use permit for the Terror Lake 
Hydroelectric Project (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission project No. 
2743) described in section 1325 of the Alaska National Interest Lands 
Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3212) is amended as depicted on the map 
entitled ``Upper Hidden Basin Diversion Project'' and dated May 18, 
2015, for the construction, operation, and maintenance of a tunnel and 
associated facilities and activities for the Upper Hidden Basin 
Diversion.
    (b) Limitation.--The tunnel and associated facilities and 
activities described in subsection (a) shall be subject to appropriate 
terms and conditions included in an amendment to a license issued by 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission pursuant to the Federal Power 
Act (16 U.S.C. 791a et seq.), including section 4(e) of that Act (16 
U.S.C. 797(e)).
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

MEYER-CHATFIELD CORP.

v.

BANK FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, 

STEVEN GOLDBERG, DAVID PAYNE, 

ARNOLD WINICK, WILLIAM BORCHERT 

AND DANIEL BARBAREE

MEYER-CHATFIELD CORP. AND 

MEYER CHATFIELD ADMINISTRATIVE 

SERVICES, LLC

v.

BANK FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, 

STEVEN GOLDBERG, DAVID PAYNE, 

ARNOLD WINICK, WILLIAM BORCHERT 

AND DANIEL BARBAREE

PETITION OF: BANK FINANCIAL 

SERVICES GROUP, STEVEN 

GOLDBERG, DAVID PAYNE, ARNOLD 

WINICK, WILLIAM BORCHERT AND 

DANIEL BARBAREE

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 716 MAL 2016

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 28th day of February, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
P. 1 

# OAR Box 1812 Prepped byOllie Stewart

Document

Number: 

# 288 ) IV--C- 1 Docket Number: 

# fr&'&3

Printed 11/3/200810:13:06

AM Sheet 288of 307P.2 

# USE 3 

# c

UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA LPROTECTIO N AGENCY 

## NO V22198 9 AN N ARBOR . MICHIGA N 4810 5 OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N

Honorabl e RoyRome r Governo r o f Colorad o Executiv e Chamber s 13 6 Stat e Capito l Denver , C O 80203-179 2 Dea r Governo r Romer : 

# nr- ii £ • DE C IIW 9 SU | EPAAislracKF L

I a m writin g inrespons e t o you r lette r t o Mr . Richar d D . Wilson , Directo r o f th e Offic e o f Mobil e Sources , date d Octobe r 11t han

d submitte d a s writte n testimonya t ou r hearin g on diese l fue l qualit ystandard s o n th e sam e date . w e ar e gratefu l fo r th e suppor t o f th e Stat e o f Colorad o i nou r effort s t o establis hnationa l diese l fue l qualit ystandards . A s par t o f ou r effort s t o produc e a fina l rule , w e wil l continu e t o evaluat e al l comment s sen t t o u s regardin g ou r proposa l and t o mak e change s i nth e Fina l Rul e wher e appropriat e and practical . You r comment s ar e bein g place d i n th e publi c docke t and wil l b e full yconsidere d a s par t o f tha t process . W e loo k forwar d t o th e receip t o f mor e detaile d comment s from

Mr . Beckhamonbehal f o f th e Colorad o Departmen t o f Health . Sincei-e l yyours, ' /^.^//^ , Charle s L . Gray , Jr/ . Directo r Emissio n Contro l Technolog yDivisio n

1322 w
llr.. stuart Jl'edden 

JlerX71LU 

J(ev JUltm:d,, Co1lnecticut 

J:Jea.1- stuarta 

14 December l951&-

When )'OU were in Wash1.Dgtol2 ~ t1ma back JOU told us that Mabel. 

aDd YoU bad once spent a 'ft:ey nice holidq at •oma mall place 1n or 

near Cba.rl.ottesville, Virgin:l&.. Do 1"0U recall. the J.'JUllt't 

BJ:babeth &nil I are plenp1ng to apend a t'ev da.Y• ot quiet and. 

rest durilJg the Cbr1atma :bolidlq aD4 will tr.Y the place 10u viaited, 

U' you remember the :Dmllt or ball to get there. We 1lHd a reat.--1'1•Jl¥ 

and at long last, t.bo -.zwacript ot our book 1a t'inished! 

I enclose vith ~~at.¥ a cow ot a l.etter I received qU1te 

recentJ,y.. Thia 'WB vholly UMX]iected, 'f:or de.ap1te tho request or the 

JSr1t&lmica that I 11Jl1t tba reviaioD to 6,000 vorda, I vent to aver 

8,500. lfeDce I 1"ulJ¥ axpected them. to ~ire the mmuscr1pt 'back to m 

v1th 1.Da\r'l.1.ctiona to cu.t it dOVJl to •iae. Sot ~ ,... there not ~n 

& murmur u t.o •ize, but alao they au.t a check ver.v- ~ ud 

t'ollOlled it up with tba latter or 'td:d.ch I .. Dd J'0\1 a cow. :ri..e 

return it. DoiJJg the Jlr1tmmica revaicm coat - COMiderable etf'art 

&Dd cU.ftrted • f'rOla the work on tbe book-4Jut 1lCN' I cu .. the viadola 

or 4'11.Dg tbe Job .. I did. ADd doll' t. xae&J.ect to rem1n4 ;rouraalt that 

'tbe ••· bad to nce:tn the :run cla:nUlCe t.rea'li1lmlt b1' ti. au:thcritiea 

'betore I COUld INbmit.. it to the JlriUmQ.ica. Oet'tire 1t writ.ten ao that 

it c:O\Ud be ci..red--tml at.ill lave it remtn u inte.ro•ti»& aD1 uae:tul. 

u t.be Dr1t&ml1ca 1-tter 1aplles--tbat ...,. to bave been a &ood trick. 

~ I don't. lave to be too modeat about the letter: 

otberv1• th2u.p are 1n eooct abape, t.oo. YU7 •centl,y I ~ 

pract1call)" all or what ve c:maed bl ti. .,- ot atoclta .... :t 'thoupt, l • d 

.,et out 11hia I bad 1'air ar 'better 't!m1 &004. pratita.. -.VW I -.de 

a a1JrtaJm but I 4on't Pa.y &1Mke at zdcht voreyiag -2>ollt llbat w had. 

m tba -.rat. 

'With our ftl7 beat. viahea ror a ~ Cb:ri•tm.a and & Jfa.PW ._ Year~ 

UJ4. l.ove to Mabe1. 

Xnclt 

a/• . ~ " .. 

roved for Release b NSA on 07-09-2014 ursuantto E.O. 1352
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1872 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require the Secretary to 

provide for the use of data from the second preceding tax year to 

carry out the simplification of applications for the estimation and determination of financial aid eligibility, to increase the income threshold 

to qualify for zero expected family contribution, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 27, 2015 

Mr. BOOKER (for himself, Ms. HIRONO, Mr. FRANKEN, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. 

SCHUMER, Mr. KAINE, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. TESTER, Mr. MARKEY, Mr. 

MURPHY, Mr. SCHATZ, and Mr. MERKLEY) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require 

the Secretary to provide for the use of data from the 

second preceding tax year to carry out the simplification 

of applications for the estimation and determination of 

financial aid eligibility, to increase the income threshold 

to qualify for zero expected family contribution, and for 

other purposes. 

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


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1872 IS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Simplifying Financial 

3 Aid for Students Act of 2015’’. 

4 SEC. 2. USING DATA FOR SECOND PRECEDING YEAR. 

5 Section 480(a)(1)(B) of the Higher Education Act of 

6 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087vv(a)(1)(B)) is amended to read as 

7 follows: 

8 ‘‘(B) Notwithstanding section 478(a) and 

9 beginning not later than 180 days after the 

10 date of enactment of the Simplifying Financial 

11 Aid for Students Act of 2015, the Secretary 

12 shall provide for the use of data from the sec13 ond preceding tax year when and to the extent 

14 necessary to carry out the simplification of ap15 plications (including simplification for a subset 

16 of applications) used for the estimation and de17 termination of financial aid eligibility. Such 

18 simplification shall include the sharing of data 

19 between the Internal Revenue Service and the 

20 Department, pursuant to the consent of the 

21 taxpayer.’’. 

22 SEC. 3. ZERO EXPECTED FAMILY CONTRIBUTION. 

23 Section 479(c) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 

24 (20 U.S.C. 1087ss(c)) is amended— 

25 (1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ‘‘$23,000’’ 

26 and inserting ‘‘$30,000’’; and 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1872 IS

1 (2) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ‘‘$23,000’’ 

2 and inserting ‘‘$30,000’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**CERTIFICATIONS**
I, Michael J. Rockenbach, certify that:
     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of EmulexCorporation;
     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report.
     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known tous by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report in being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, asof the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent function):
 a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal controlover financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal controls overfinancial reporting.
Date: May 10, 2004
/s/ Michael J. RockenbachMichael J. RockenbachChief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 31B