alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
714241_1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

-----------------------------------------------------------------x

IN RE: WORLD TRADE CENTER LOWER

MANHATTAN DISASTER SITE LOCATION

:

:

:

:

21 MC 102 (AKH)

ELECTRONICALLY FILED

-----------------------------------------------------------------x

FABIO MORALES (AND WIFE, MARTHA 

MORALES),

 Plaintiff,

 v.

100 CHURCH, LLC, ET. AL.,

 Defendants.

: 

: 

:

:

Case No.: 07CV1667 (AKH)

NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF 

MASTER ANSWER BY 

DEFENDANT JPMORGAN 

CHASE BANK N.A.

-----------------------------------------------------------------x

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. as and 

for its responses to the allegations set forth in the Complaint by Adoption (Check-off Complaint) 

related to the Master Complaint filed in the above referenced action, hereby adopts its Master 

Answer to the Master Complaint, dated August 3, 2007, which was filed in the matter of In re 

World Trade Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH).

WHEREFORE, defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. respectfully requests that 

the above captioned actions be dismissed, with costs, attorneys’ fees, disbursements, and such 

other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Dated: New York, New York 

December 14, 2007

SATTERLEE STEPHENS BURKE & BURKE LLP

By: /s/James J. Coster_____________

James J. Coster (JC-1431)

Case 1:07-cv-01667-AKH Document 23 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 1 of 2
714241_1

2

230 Park Avenue

New York, New York 10169

Tel.: (212) 818-9200

Fax: (212) 818-9606

Attorneys for Defendant

JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.

TO: Gregory J. Cannata, Esq.

Law Office of Gregory J. Cannata

233 Broadway

New York, NY 10279

Robert Grochow, Esq. 

Law Office of Robert Grochow

233 Broadway

New York, NY 10279

Christopher LoPalo, Esq.

Worby Groner Edelman Napoli and Bern

115 Broadway, 12th Floor 

New York, New York 10006

Case 1:07-cv-01667-AKH Document 23 Filed 12/14/2007 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                RIGL CORPORATION
                        COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                                   (UNAUDITED)



                                                      1999            1998
                                                   3RD QUARTER    3RD QUARTER
<S>                                              <C>              <C>
BASIC EARNINGS PER SHARE:

Common shares outstanding, beginning of period

Effects of weighting shares:
   Weighted common shares issued
                                                 ---------------  ------------

Weighted average number of common shares             12,795,078    12,669,675
                                                 ===============  ============
   outstanding

Net Income (Loss)                                $(1,028,745.00)  (428,883.00)
                                                 ===============  ============

Earnings Per Share                               $        (0.08)        (0.03)
                                                 ===============  ============


DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE:

Common shares outstanding, beginning of period

Effects of weighting shares:

   Weighted common shares issued                     12,883,190    12,730,303
                                                 ---------------  ------------

Weighted average number of common shares and
   common equivalent shares outstanding              12,883,190    12,730,303
                                                 ===============  ============

Net Income (Loss)                                $(1,028,745.00)  (428,883.00)
                                                 ===============  ============

Earnings Per Share                               $        (0.08)        (0.03)
                                                 ===============  ============
</TABLE>

<PAGE>
**EXHIBIT15**

May9, 2007

Securities andExchange Commission

100 F Street, N.E.

Washington, D.C.20549

Commissioners:

We are aware that ourreport dated May 9, 2007 on our review of interim financial information of W.R. Grace & Co. (the “Company”) for the three-month periods ended March 31,2007 and March 31, 2006 and included in the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, is incorporated by reference in itsRegistration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-37024, 333-49083, 333-49507,333-49509, 333-49511, 333-49513, 333-49515 and 333-49517).
| Very truly yours,              |
|--------------------------------|
|                           |
|                           |
| /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP |   |
| PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP     |
| McLean, Virginia               |

 

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6097

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

IYMAN FARIS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District

Judge. (1:03-cr-00189-LMB; 1:06-cv-00132-LMB)

Submitted: July 2, 2007 Decided: September 19, 2007

Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Iyman Faris, Appellant Pro Se. William Neil Hammerstrom, Jr.,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for

Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Iyman Faris seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is

not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Faris has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability, deny Faris’s motion for appointment of counsel, and

dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process. 

DISMISSED
Case 1:07-cv-01542-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 1 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01542-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 2 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01542-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 3 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01542-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 4 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01542-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 5 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01542-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 6 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01542-AKH Document 11 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 7 of 7
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Terry Polistina, certify that:
         1.      I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the yearended December 31, 2003 of Applica Incorporated;
         2.      Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain anyuntrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respectto the period covered by this report;
         3.      Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and otherfinancial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report;
         4.      The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I areresponsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:
          a)     designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared;
          b)     evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and
          c)     disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
         5.      The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I havedisclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent function):
          a)     all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and
          b)     any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: March 8, 2004 /s/ Terry PolistinaName: Terry Polistina
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Harvey Bayer, Appellant.

by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Battisti, J.), rendered June 14, 1985, convicting him of promoting gambling in the second degree and possession of a gambling device, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant, a shareholder and director of his codefendant B. P. Tavern, Inc., was jointly indicted and tried together with B. P. Tavern, Inc., another shareholder and director and two of its employees for certain gambling offenses in connection with the operation of a "Joker Poker” machine at Billy’s Pub located in Mount Vernon, New York. The nonjury trial resulted in convictions of 4 of the 5 defendants. On appeal the defendant argues that the statements he made to an Assistant District Attorney outside the presence of counsel on April 25, 1984, six days after the execution of a search warrant for the premises of Billy’s Pub, were improperly admitted into evidence in violation of his right to counsel. We disagree.

In the first instance, we note that although the claimed deprivation of the State constitutional right to counsel may be raised for the first time on appeal, a sufficient factual record must be made to permit appellate review *(see, People v Kinchen,*60 NY2d 772). No factual record was established to permit appellate review of this issue. In any event, contrary to the defendant’s position, the ex parte application for a search warrant did not constitute an adversarial judicial criminal proceeding at which point the defendant’s right of counsel indelibly attached *(see, People v Smith,*62 NY2d 306; *People v Robinson,*122 AD2d 173, *lv denied*68 NY2d 1003; *People v Mullings,*110 AD2d 720; *People v Frankos,*110 AD2d 713).

We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contentions and have found them to be without merit *(see, People v Herman,*133 AD2d 377 [decided herewith]). Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Bracken and Brown, JJ., concur.
NOTICE TO CLERK OF COURT: Please accept this Initiating Complaint as an initial pleading 

pursuant to CMO __, dated ____________, of Hon. Alvin K. Hellerstein in In Re World Trade 

Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

 

IN RE WORLD TRADE CENTER LOWER 

MANHATTAN DISASTER SITE LITIGATION 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

21 MC 102 (AKH) 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

XXXXX, 

 Plaintiff(s), 

 -againstXXXXX, 

 Defendants. 

--------------------------------------------------------------X 

 XX Civ. XXXX (AKH) 

INITIATING COMPLAINT

Pursuant to Case Management Order No. __ (“CMO __”) dated June __, 2007 by Hon. 

Alvin K. Hellerstein, U.S.D.J., in In Re World Trade Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site 

Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH), Plaintiff(s) hereby submit this Initiating Complaint against the 

above named Defendants and state: 

1. Plaintiff ____________ (XXXX) [Å last 4 digits of social security number] 

currently resides at ______________. 

2. Plaintiff(s) have a claim for injury against the Defendants named above that 

would be encompassed within the scope of the In Re World Trade Center Lower Manhattan 

Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 

3. Plaintiffs will file a fully complete Check-Off Complaint under this docket 

number within 30 days of the filing of this Initiating Complaint. 

Case 1:07-cv-05360-AKH Document 2-4 Filed 06/29/2007 Page 1 of 2
NOTICE TO CLERK OF COURT: Please accept this Initiating Complaint as an initial pleading 

pursuant to CMO __, dated ____________, of Hon. Alvin K. Hellerstein in In Re World Trade 

Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH). 

Dated: _____ __, 200X 

{law firm name} 

Attorney(s) for 

Plaintiff(s)_______________________ 

By: ________ 

 {name} 

{law firm address} 

Telephone: _______________ 

Case 1:07-cv-05360-AKH Document 2-4 Filed 06/29/2007 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05300-AKH Document 28 Filed 11/02/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05300-AKH Document 28 Filed 11/02/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### ROCHESTER *&*KETTLE FALLS LAND CO., Respondent, v. DAVIS, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Fifth Department.

June 20, 1894.)

Action by the Rochester & Kettle Falls Land Company against R. Irving Davis.

No opinion. Judgment appealed from affirmed, with costs, on the opinion of Bradley, J., at special term.
Case 1:07-cv-05742-RJH Document 30 Filed 04/23/2008 Page 1 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05742-RJH Document 30 Filed 04/23/2008 Page 2 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05742-RJH Document 30 Filed 04/23/2008 Page 3 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05742-RJH Document 30 Filed 04/23/2008 Page 4 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05742-RJH Document 30 Filed 04/23/2008 Page 5 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05742-RJH Document 30 Filed 04/23/2008 Page 6 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05742-RJH Document 30 Filed 04/23/2008 Page 7 of 8
Case 1:07-cv-05742-RJH Document 30 Filed 04/23/2008 Page 8 of 8
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                        Independent Auditors' Consent

The Board of Directors
Concorde Gaming Corporation:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
33-52388) on Form S-8 of Concorde Gaming Corporation of our report dated
November 8, 1996, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Concorde
Gaming Corporation and subsidiaries as of September 30, 1996, and 1995, and the
related consolidated statements of income, stockholders' equity, and cash flows
for each of the years in the two-year period ended September 30, 1996, which
report appears in the September 30, 1996, annual report on Form 10-KSB of
Concorde Gaming Corporation.



KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
December 27, 1996
Case 1:07-cv-01540-AKH Document 8 Filed 09/11/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-01540-AKH Document 8 Filed 09/11/2007 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 23.1





Consent of Ernst & Young LLP,


Independent Auditors




---




Consent of Independent Auditors





We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-3 Nos. 333-80001, 333-39006, 333-86342-16) of Federal Express Corporation and
in the related Prospectuses, of our reports dated June 24, 2002, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Federal Express Corporation included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended May 31, 2002.





/s/    ERNST & YOUNG LLP





July 23, 2002


Memphis, Tennessee
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      Exhibit 23

                                AUDITOR'S CONSENT

We have issued our report dated February 12, 1999, accompanying the consolidated
financial statements and schedule included in the Annual Report of
Windmere-Durable Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
1998. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of the aforementioned
report in the Registration Statements of Windmere-Durable Holdings, Inc. on Form
S-8 (File No. 33-7681, effective September 30, 1986), Form S-8 (File No.
33-36424, effective August 17, 1990), Form S-2 (File No. 33-51776, effective
January 19, 1993), Form S-8 (File No. 33-58574, effective February 22, 1993),
Form S-8 (File No. 333-52389, effective May 12, 1998) and on Form S-8 (File No.
333-52383, effective May 12, 1998).

GRANT THORNTON LLP

Miami, Florida
March 29, 1999
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration StatementNos. 33-59497 and 333-08139 on Forms S-8 of our reports dated March 18,2009, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statementschedule of Nature’s Sunshine Products, Inc. and subsidiaries (whichreport expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraphrelating to the adoption of Financial Accounting Standards Board InterpretationNo. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes”) and theeffectiveness of Nature’s Sunshine Products, Inc. and subsidiaries’internal control over financial reporting (which report expresses an adverseopinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financialreporting because of material weaknesses), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-Kof Nature’s Sunshine Products, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31,2008.

 
| /s/  Deloitte & Touche LLP |   |
|------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                     |
| Salt Lake City, Utah                     |
| March 18, 2009                      |

 

----
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 19



                          Schedule of certain documents
                   substantially identical to filed documents
                     with parties thereto and other material
                                differing details
                          -----------------------------


(19)(a) Additional parties to Special Deferred Compensation Agreement, as
        amended, in substantially the forms incorporated by reference to Exhibit
        (ix) to Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 24, 1977, to Exhibit 
        (2) to Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 23, 1983, and to
        Exhibit (19)(c) to Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30,
        1986:

                                 Paul R. D'Aloia
                                 Don R. Graber
                                 I. Edward Tonkon

(19)(b) Additional parties to Severance Pay Agreement, as amended, in
        substantially the form incorporated by reference to Exhibit (xi) to Form
        10-K for the fiscal year ended June 27, 1980, and to Exhibit 10(n) to
        Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 26, 1991:

                                 Paul R. D'Aloia
                                 I. Edward Tonkon

(19)(c) Additional party to Severance Pay Agreement, in substantially the form
        incorporated by reference to Exhibit (19)(a) to Form 10-Q for the fiscal
        quarter ended June 20, 1986:

                                 Don R. Graber
Case 1:07-cv-01654-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 1 of 4Case 1:07-cv-01654-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 2 of 4Case 1:07-cv-01654-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 3 of 4Case 1:07-cv-01654-AKH Document 4 Filed 08/07/2007 Page 4 of 4
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 Megadata Corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James
T. Barry, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, 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 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.


                                                     By: /s/ James T. Barry
                                                         ----------------------
                                                         James T. Barry
                                                         Chief Executive Officer
                                                         January 27, 2006
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Paul G. Van Wagenen, certify that:

I have reviewed this amendmentto the Annual Report on Form 10-Kof Pogo Producing Company (the “Company”);

Based on my knowledge, this amendment to the annual reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, andother financial information included in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

Date:October 27, 2006

|   | /s/ PAUL G. VAN WAGENEN                         |   |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Paul G. Van Wagenen                             |
|   | Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
Case 1:07-cv-01546-AKH Document 26-2 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-01546-AKH Document 26-2 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-01546-AKH Document 26-2 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-01546-AKH Document 26-2 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 4 of 4