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



Exhibit 21
 
 PLACE OF
    
    
    
    % OF VOTINGCOMPANY
    
    INCORPORATION
    
    
    
    STOCK OWNEDInternational Helicopter Transport, Inc.
    
    Louisiana
    
    
    100
    %Evangeline Airmotive, Inc.
    
    Louisiana
    
    
    100
    %Air Evac Services, Inc.
    
    Louisiana
    
    
    100
    %PHI Air Medical Services, Inc.
    
    Louisiana
    
    
    100
    %Petroleum Helicopters International, Inc.
    
    Louisiana
    
    
    100
    %Helicopter Management, LLC
    
    Louisiana
    
    
    100
    %Helicopter Leasing, LLC
    
    Louisiana
    
    
    100
    %HELEX, LLC
    
    Florida
    
    
    100
    %Sky Leasing
    
    Montana
    
    
    100
    %PHI Angola
    
    Angola
    
    
    100
    %Petroleum Helicopters Angola Limitada
    
    Angola
    
    
    49
    %PHI International, LTD
    
    Cayman
    
    
    100
    %Energy Risk LTD
    
    Bermuda
    
    
    100
    %
June 25 , 2015



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

RICHARD GENE SOLOM ON , Appellant

NO. 14

- 14

- 00134

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

____________ ____________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED

.

We further order this decisio n certified below for observance.
Case 1:07-cv-03314-GBD Document 40 Filed 02/15/2008 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03314-GBD Document 40 Filed 02/15/2008 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-03314-GBD Document 40 Filed 02/15/2008 Page 3 of 3
#### Marta Lydia ALAS-SORTO, aka Blanca Silvia Mejia-Segura, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES,* Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 04-72574.

Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted March 23, 2005.**

Decided April 11, 2005.

Judith L. Wood, Esq., Law Offices of Judith L. Wood, Human Rights Project, Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.

CAS-Distriet Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Diego, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, John M. McAdams, Jr., DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before B. FLETCHER, TROTT, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

*

 Alberto Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States, pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).

**

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM ***

Marta Lydia Alas-Sorto, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“U”) order denying her motion to reopen proceedings in which she was ordered deported in absentia. We have jurisdiction pursuant to former 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). *Socop-Gonzalez v. INS,*272 F.3d 1176, 1183 (9th Cir.2001) (en banc). Reviewing for abuse of discretion, *id.*at 1187, we deny the petition for review.

Contrary to Alas-Sorto’s contentions, the agency provided her with sufficient notice of her immigration proceedings. *See*8 U.S.C. § 1229(a)(1); *Khan v. Ashcroft,*374 F.3d 825, 828-29 (9th Cir.2004). The IJ concluded, and the record evinces, that Alas-Sorto was personally served with the Order to Show Cause (“OSC”). The OSC was in both English, and AlasSorto’s native language of Spanish, and gives the time and location of the hearing *892as well as the consequences for failure to appear.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Exhibit 31.1





CERTIFICATIONS



I, Kenneth W. Brimmer, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this Form 10-KSB of STEN Corporation;

2.

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|Date  December 20, 2006 | /s/ Kenneth W. Brimmer 
|----------------------- | -----------------------
|                        | Chief Executive Officer
#### STATE v. BORDERS

No. 71 PC.

Case below: 35 N.C. App. 277.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 8 May 1978.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Edward Guida, against Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Respondent. The State Industrial Commission, Appellant.

*Guida*v. *Pennsylvania It. R. Co.,*183 App. Div. 822, affirmed.

(Argued November 12, 1918;

decided November 26, 1918.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third- judicial department, entered July 1, 1918, reversing an award of the state industrial commission made under the Workmen’s Compensation Law and dismissing the claim. The award was for funeral expenses on account of the death of Michael Panella, who died as a result of burns received by him while engaged in cleaning a boiler at the Pennsylvania Railroad Company’s power house at Long Island City, which supplies electric current for the Long Island Railroad Company and for the Pennsylvania Railroad Company. The trains operated by the Long Island Railroad Company, which derive their motive power from this power house, run entirely within the state of New York, but are engaged indiscriminately in both interstate and intrastate commerce. The trains of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, which are operated through current generated from this power house, run from the Long Island City yards in the state of New York to Manhattan transfer in the state of New Jersey. The defendant *713contended that its employee was engaged in interstate commerce at the time of the accident.

*Merton E. Lewis, Attorney-General (E. C. Aiken*of counsel), for appellant.

*Ray Rood Allen*and *Samuel C. Coleman*for respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Cuddeback and McLaughlin, JJ. Dissenting: Hogan and Crane, JJ. _
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

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

A. C., and H. C., by their Next Friend BARBARA WEINER, :

individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, :

:

Plaintiffs, : 05 Civ. 2986 (TPG) 

:

- against - :

:

JOHN MATTINGLY, in his official capacity as Commissioner :

of the New York City Administration for Children’s Services, :

and JOHN JOHNSON, in his official capacity as Commissioner :

of the New York State Office of Children and Family Services, : NOTICE OF MOTION

:

Defendants. : 

:

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

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the Amended Complaint on behalf of the Plaintiffs

A. C. and H. C., dated June 17, 2005; the Declaration of Jennifer Baum, dated June 17, 2005, and

the accompanying Memorandum of Law; plaintiffs A.C. and H.C. shall move this Court before

the Honorable Thomas P. Griesa, United States District Judge, at the United States Courthouse,

500 Pearl Street, New York, New York, on July 8, 2005, at 9:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as

counsel may be heard, for an order:

1. Pursuant to Rule 23(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, certifying that the

above-entitled action shall be maintained as a class action under Rules 23(b)(1)(A) and 23(b)(2)

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

2. Defining a subclass of all children in New York City who are now, were on or

after July 1, 2004, or will in the future be, residing in foster care with relatives who are within the

second or third degree of consanguinity of their parents or stepparents; and

Case 1:07-cv-03308-TPG Document 2 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 1 of 2
2

3. Granting such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 6.1(b)(2), any

opposing affidavits and answering memoranda shall be served within ten business days after

service of this moving paper.

Dated: New York, New York

June 17, 2005

Respectfully submitted,

THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY

ADRIENE L. HOLDER, Esq.

Attorney-in-Charge, Civil Division

SCOTT A. ROSENBERG, Esq. (SAR5579)

Director of Litigation, Civil Division

JENNIFER BAUM, Esq., of counsel (JB4030)

GARY SOLOMON, Esq. (GS 5626)

Director of Legal Support, Juvenile Rights Division

NANCY ROSENBLOOM Esq. (NR1275)

Director of Litigation, Juvenile Rights Division

LOUIS SARTORI, Esq., of counsel (LSS0011)

199 Water Street

New York, New York 10038

(212) 577-3300

By: ____________/s/________________________

 JENNIFER BAUM, Esq., of counsel (JB4030)

TO: 

Carolyn A. Kubitschek, Esq. Madonna M. Kasbohm, Esq.

LANSNER & KUBITSCHEK Office of Corporation Counsel

325 Broadway, Suite 201 100 Church Street, 2nd Floor

New York, NY 10007 New York, New York 10007

Frederick J. Magovern, Esq. Robert L. Kraft, Esq.

Magovern and Sclafani Assistant Attorney General

111 John Street, Suite 1509 120 Broadway, 24 Floor th

New York, New York 10038 New York, New York 10271

Case 1:07-cv-03308-TPG Document 2 Filed 04/25/2007 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 10.1


 


JOINDER AGREEMENT


 


March 15, 2022


 


By executing this joinder,
the undersigned hereby agrees, as of the date first set forth above, that the undersigned shall become a party to that certain Letter
Agreement, dated February 9, 2021 (as may be amended or restated from time to time), by and among ScION Tech Growth II (the “Company”),
ScION 2 Sponsor LLC, and the executive officers and directors of the Company.


 


[Signature Page Follows]


 




     


     

    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
the parties hereto have caused this Joinder Agreement to be signed as of the day and year first above written.


 


	 	/s/ Kunal Gullapalli
	 	Kunal Gullapalli


 


	ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:	 
	 	 
	SCION TECH GROWTH II	 
	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Mathew J. Cestar	 
	 	Name: Mathew J. Cestar	 
	 	Title: Chief Executive Officer	 


 


[Signature Page to Joinder Agreement]
#### STATE v. HARRIS

No. 157 PC.

Case below: 19 N.C. App. 48.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 31 August 1973.
Document

Exhibit 10.30




Master Agreement Change Order
															
					
					


General Services Agreement Change Order




Change Order Number: CW1760559
Bank of America General Services Agreement Number: CW251208


This General Services Agreement (GSA) Change Order CW1760559 which is effective upon 
the date of the last signature, extends the term of GSA number CW251208, including 
Amendments CW372019, CW811075, CW1417829, CW1569602, CW641256, and CW967765 
thereto, through August 31, 2022. All other terms and conditions of the original GSA, except as 
mutually amended, will remain unchanged. 





									
	Agreed to:		Agreed to:
	Bank of America, N.A	 	Cardlytics, Inc.
		 	
	/s/ Sam Griffin		/s/ Andrew Christiansen
	W Sam Griffin		Andrew Christiansen
	Sr. Procurement Specialist		Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
#### JAMES W. SHUGART, Appellant, v. JOYCE A. SHUGART, Respondent.

No. 7914

October 30, 1975

541 P.2d 1101

[Rehearing denied November 21, 1975]

*686
      *Lorin D. Parraguirre,*of Las Vegas, for Appellant.

*Michael L. Hines,*of Las Vegas, for Respondent.

OPINION

*Per Curiam:*

This appeal from a judgment divorcing the parties challenges the awards of alimony and child support, and the property distribution as well. Since the trial was not reported, the appellant attempted to utilize the provisions of NRAP 10(c).1 However, the statement of the evidence or proceedings was not submitted to the district court for settlement and approval and, therefore, may not be considered as a part of the record on appeal. United States v. Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Co., 281 F.2d 698, 701 (1960). Consequently, we are wholly unable to evaluate the assigned errors.

Affirmed.

NRAP 10(c): “. . . Thereupon the statement and any objections or proposed amendments shall be submitted to the district court for settlement and approval and as settled and approved shall be included by the clerk of the district court in the record on appeal.”
"_ _-.- -. -- " -A-._-_A-.... .-- -1. ---'- 't \ r. -- ~ ~ 

: ,, . \.. r s :,.-I){, :,;..:.LJ::. ! :. 

i. 

:- '- : : 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK . . 

~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

IN RE: 

i MASTER FILE 

FOSAMAX PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION 

i I :06-MD-I 789 (SFK) 

Tliis Dorrl~nor~ Hclilres To ,411 Actiolis 

CASE MANAGEblENT ORDER NO. 14 

(Regarding Motions to Remand) 

SOHN F. KEENAh1, Unitcd States 1)istricl .ludgc: 

It has beconic apparent that motions to remand \\zl~icli wcre filed in transfcror 

courts and rcmain pending belorc this Court. as well as thosc which are expcctcd to be filed in 

this Court. \rill raise overlapping challenges to this Court's subject matter jurisdiction. In ordcr 

to resolve thcse jurisdiclional issues promptly and efficiently, it is hcreby ORDERED (hat: 

1. For cases transrerrcd to this Cou~t on or heforc March 1, 2008: All remand 

motions shall be served on the Defendant by March 31. 2008. DeTendant shall sen-c its responsc 

to thcse remand motions on or before April 21, 2008. Plaintiffs may servc a reply on or before 

May 2, 2008. On May 2, 2008, cach party shall file its molion papers and provide the Court 

\\it11 courtesy copies. Defendant also shall file on tlic master docket a list of all cascs with 

rcmand motions pending as of that datc. 

2. For cases transfcrred to this Court aftcr March 1, 2008: On thc last business 

day of Junc 2008 and aery sccond month thereafter, DeTendant shall notify thc Court of any 

ne\v remand motions that have been filed. Defcndant shall file and selvc papers in opposition 

thcreto within fourtecn days. PlaintiSfs affected by such motions may scrve and file rcply 

papers. and provide the Court with courtesy copies ofthcir motion papers, within fourteen days 

thereafter. 

SO ORDERED 

Daled: Ncw York. N.Y. 

Decenlbcr z./ , 200? 

- 

United States District Judse 

Case 1:07-cv-03295-JFK Document 17 Filed 12/26/2007 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of K-tel International, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Philip Kives,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.               The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

2.               The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
| By                                   | /s/ PHILIP KIVES |   |
|--------------------------------------|------------------|--------|
| Philip Kives                         |             |   |
| *Chairman, Chief Executive Officer,* |             |   |
| *President and Director*             |             |   |
| September 18, 2006                   |             |   |
|                                      |                  |        |  |  |

 

----
EXHIBIT 23.2


                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS


         We hereby  consent to the use of our name in the Annual  Report on Form
10-K of Seagull Energy Corporation and Subsidiaries (the "Company") for the year
ended December 31, 1996,  and the  incorporation  by reference  thereof into the
Company's registration statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 2-72014, 2-80834,  33-14463,
33-43483,  33-50643,  33-50645, 33-64041 and 333-13393), Forms S-8 and S-3 (Nos.
2-93087 and 33-22475) and Form S-3 (Nos. 33-53729, 33-65118 and 33-64051).




                                           /s/ RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
                                               PETROLEUM ENGINEERS
                                               RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
                                               PETROLEUM ENGINEERS



Houston, Texas
March 24, 1997
**Exhibit32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of K-tel International, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kimmy Lockwood,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1.                     The reportfully complies with the requirement of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

2.                     Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.
| By                            | /s/ KIMMY LOCKWOOD |   |
|-------------------------------|--------------------|--------|
| Kimmy Lockwood                |               |
| *Principal Financial Officer* |               |
| February 14, 2007             |               |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  UT
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      Dec-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                           Jun-30-2000
<BOOK-VALUE>                             PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>               2,416,089
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>               384,815
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                    197,903
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                  220,984
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          3,219,791
<COMMON>                                  449,697
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                  (1,668)
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                       424,163
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>            872,192
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          62
<PREFERRED>                                39,000
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                      955,943
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                              0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                       0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>            159,360
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>              73,957
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                       0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                     0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>          1,119,277
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>           3,219,791
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                 418,359
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                       19,259
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                341,888
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                361,147
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                    57,212
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                          6,471
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>             63,683
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   36,368
<NET-INCOME>                               57,388
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                   824
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>              56,564
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                   51,353
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                  28,739
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                    143,985
<EPS-BASIC>                                0.91
<EPS-DILUTED>                                0.91


</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION BOARD, as Liquidating Agent of U.S. Central Federal Credit Union and of Western Corporate Federal Credit Union,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

GOLDMAN SACHS AND CO; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 13

- 56851

D.C. No. 2:11

- cv

- 06521

- GW

- JEM

ORDER *

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION BOARD, as Liquidating Agent of U.S. Central Federal Credit Union and of Western Corporate Federal Credit Union,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

GOLDMAN SACHS AND CO; et al.,

Defendants

- Appellants. No. 13

- 56852

D.C. No. 2:11

- cv

- 06521

- GW

- JEM

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3. 

# FILED

MAY 24 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION

ADMINISTRATION BOA RD,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

GOLDMAN SACHS & CO and GS MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP,

Defendants

- Appellants. No. 14

- 55309

D.C. No. 2:11

- cv

- 06521

- GW

- JEM

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California George H. Wu, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted December 8, 2015

Pasadena, California

Before: D.W. NELSON, REINHARDT, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

The joint stipulated motion of Plaintiff

- Appellant

- Cross

- Ap pellee and

Defendants

- Appellees

- Cross

- Appellants to voluntarily dismiss these cases under

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b) is granted. Each party shall bear its own

costs.

These appeals are DISMISSED.
Case 1:07-cv-03314-GBD Document 36 Filed 02/15/2008 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-03314-GBD Document 36 Filed 02/15/2008 Page 2 of 2