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

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 598

To guarantee the ability of licensed pharmacists to conduct the practice

of pharmacy compounding and to ensure their right to the necessary

supply of bulk drug products, subject to applicable State and Federal

laws.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 20, 1995

Mr. BREWSTER (for himself, Mr. DELAY, and Mr. FIELDS of Texas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce

A BILL

To guarantee the ability of licensed pharmacists to conduct

the practice of pharmacy compounding and to ensure

their right to the necessary supply of bulk drug products,

subject to applicable State and Federal laws.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pharmacy

5 Compounding Preservation Act of 1994.’’
2

HR 598 IH

1 SEC. 2. APPLICATIONS OF STATE AND FEDERAL LAW TO

2 THE PRACTICE OF PHARMACY

3 COMPOUNDING.

4 Amend section 210(gg) of the Food, Drug and Cos5 metic Act, 21 U.S.C. 321(gg): ‘‘Notwithstanding any

6 other provision of law, the provisions of this Act do not

7 apply to licensed retail pharmacies that compound drugs

8 in conformance with applicable local laws regulating the

9 practice of pharmacy and medicine. The provisions of this

10 Act do not apply to bulk drug products that are intended

11 to be used by pharmacies for compounding, except to the

12 extent that such provisions relate directly to the purity

13 and quality of such bulk drug products.’’.

Æ
2007 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

6-18-2007

Snyder v. Aaron

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 06-2666

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2007 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Snyder v. Aaron" (2007). 2007 Decisions. Paper 925.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007/925
NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

 

No. 06-2666

 

MARSHA KAY SNYDER,

 Appellant

v.

MARK AARON, District Attorney;

JAMES G. ARNER, President Judge;

RALPH MONTANA, Solicitor; THE COUNTY

OF CLARION; TROOPER ROBERT S. HAGETER, JR.,

Pennsylvania State Police; STANLEY DRAKE

 

On Appeal From the United States District Court

For the Western District of Pennsylvania

(D.C. Civ. No. 05-cv-1602)

District Judge: Honorable Donetta W. Ambrose

 

Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

December 26, 2006

 

Before: BARRY, CHAGARES AND ROTH, CIRCUIT JUDGES.

(Filed: June 18, 2007)

 

OPINION

 

PER CURIAM
Marsha Kay Snyder appeals the District Court’s order dismissing her complaint. 

Snyder filed a complaint alleging that the appellees failed to fully prosecute persons who

broke into her home and assaulted her. After her initial complaint was dismissed for lack

of standing, Snyder filed an amended complaint alleging that appellees violated several

Pennsylvania criminal statutes by failing to fully prosecute those persons involved in the

break-in and assault. The District Court dismissed the amended complaint for lack of

standing. Snyder filed a timely notice of appeal, and we have jurisdiction under 28

U.S.C. § 1291.

We exercise plenary review over the grant of a motion to dismiss for lack of

standing. Leuthner v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of N.E. Pa., 454 F.3d 120, 124 (3d Cir.

2006). We agree with the District Court that Snyder lacked standing to bring her claims. 

See Linda R.S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 619 (1973)(“[A] private citizen lacks a

judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or nonprosecution of another.”) 

For essentially the reasons given by the District Court, we will affirm the District

Court’s judgment. 

2
**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 Sonic Solutions (the “Company”) on Form
      10-K for the year ending March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, David C. Habiger,
      President of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for
      purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that
      to the best of my knowledge:




(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, 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 at the dates
      and for the periods indicated.




This
      certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission.




Date: June 14, 2006


By:
              /s/ David
                C.
                HabigerName: 
David
                C. HabigerTitle:    President and Chief Executive
                Officer
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 24.3


                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENT, that the undersigned, Patrick J. Lavelle,
constitutes and appoints Yehoram Uziel and Robert E. Kassel, or either of them,
his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact and agents, each with full power of
substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in
any and all capacities, to sign the Form 10-KSB, Annual Report of Soligen
Technologies, Inc., a Wyoming Corporation, for the fiscal year ended March 31,
1999, and any amendments or supplements thereto, and to file this Power of
Attorney and the Form 10-KSB, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in
connection therewith with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the
Superintendent of the British Columbia Securities Commission, the American Stock
Exchange and the Vancouver Stock Exchange, granting unto each of said
attorneys-in-fact and agents full power and authority to do and perform each and
every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the
premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do in
person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that each of said attorneys-fact and
agents, or his substitutes, may do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

             Dated this      21st       day of June 1999
                         --------------


Signature




/s/ Patrick J. Lavelle
----------------------------------
Patrick J. Lavelle, Director
'<> FILED IN COURTOF CRIMINALAPPEALS .xv r»e JUN19 2015 T^xclS cou,lit ofcRt/nltfa,! Affe&is

— -• , , _ ^b©1 Acosta. Clerk .Q.Sc&-r tier.t\cuhdc^ X jAp^vJljUAJl- -f- \7j (q^Q Ch-e&buejiL Cojjjttyy T*Y&.f V. Th-e £ te^t-e o f Tck-c^S X TyL^rt t nicrf yf Appea^iS tets<- */u*«b-cr&-/$-pn2i>0~C/l s±fL/SL-e^U-e^£- 

### Arff*.i,jrjL.nf- tftrA/&,noLc?- -FirSt ^iption For wt-ensio* af_
TO th-e. j4o^nfi^SLB TuStitPS of £c->d Coi^rti

C<?yw.^g sisn ^ oScc^r tit,rA/ar*\tA.e7-;A~fpeUr^i>i+ pffi Se.j Cund-Fijes 

### fh,%5 %nfji~ldh -for cuh zxtes/o* t)-f S(ir^YC6>o) da~ySIn which tof/lc 

### .a^p^jzi±ioja—ffij^^lscj^^iiati^ry t<cir* e-*" Cja_D]£Lsxn sULppeLr-t -rh-ertpfi^ -h*—SMo-h^S th*L jfzoJULt&LlJi^ .A-ff^llfi-h'f ^P^ cqk viewed In th-e. Ihd PiStrict- comrt ofchewIre*. 

### Tyler CoLcrt o-fa^M &Ws ( A pae(,(aJJre. Co.r•*. yvu.*>\b<4>S 1%-ft~-<X>Z&a-c(>„ Th+. fr-e<~r.n± ^W///i& for filing, th^_pjDr if TiMe ZB^hj_£4l3r^_

sisfft bath XH^ 

### r+g.ftj&+- -far «-*• *.X"t*>hSion i3 btuS-ed on (1) A^p*,lia^to. T ,> -for/ried n^faoiLT rh^. Cpt^tt of txypee^fs a,f£Itr<*zu'rtjf cchoLut rh-e ccijufrt offfj0va,is d^JLhJon, to g^i^th i-*^<^( r^prrS^^tt^tlm^ £o-r^i^^&^L&i^Q±jKJzt-Jjt&ti—A't« I-e^fljsjpen CAffiej-l&ja-tls afpell^te 

### ^XfeQ_/j&^^?i^(^Q^^/l^^-t th&Jt-h^ 'ag(( /vet fe.fr****^ • 

### Afpjutt&ht on th-c p_Qjl_ 'j^jftu^^^/2{ijeJl&Mit -fr&±ft, Thi*} a>iA*rf yt:&,ntS- 

### ^rt^hd- th^c de^c/iln^ -For fU)h_g^£h£^JL Jja, hsnj-tT&dU VU*UEALSjfl<;mv> tie -m^firm ^b^Aeogta.CierlrJLUtM £*>l-U FH Teui-eSS-e-c Cff(/rnyf I*^*r&~<> JjTj-J^U pro 5-e J3LACOLA1E5 t> EC LA RaTXQA/ 

### _"H QSCcoir HeJ^ouin^^^Tf)C^^CJL^noir7Zl^X^J^^l^^ %L£$jgsiTty ItyCcurc-er&St-cd on -f-ft-e. A\jch(^^( iA" l+- of The Tejrtfcs Q e.pa,H-/n *hf 

### af crV\<hItta^l—Tii-SJt-l-Cje in And-erson fdv-nJhy, T*k~£e^$; \r^rify_u&dd-eCltcr-e. LLJLcL&r: p-enct,\fy of f>rrjt*~ty i~h^i~ th^. fof^v-elh^.

- 5-tuA-r/i* * /* T.S ast* t-ru.* a..* d f.prr*.-af , P*c-e..ctA t^J oh -H» /s 

### Th* ft dcLsf q-fj-u.tr&j xei<r e OStct-r H*rr>a,nd€Zc-erttf/ e,*-T< at" S-ervlc^ 

### X CiiCcoir HefHo-'hiJ-t-'Z'j T0cj--?tai$~7i?£2j fortify j-^^t &- -trot*. -tuncL cexf-e^t. cxtpyL^^f—^h-^- fotx^Qti&^p±&<udhiifr^\^£^*> yylez-c-ed^ Xkx^Th< Ai-a^LLkcLX—QM—th-c. /nLcJL6^e.( uMit-y-fU?^ f^* " " ''"J

CJu^CO-h-e^ LCUrhfy Ms-fnUJ- Atj-or/ife-yL

y^i. <f,J-.ha.\ /. Pfottnh

P.ot.'fin^ urn Hu5Ki T* 7r7r<T 

### Qsctgfc fhv^r^^/si ^L 05 rcuR M*.rAScuA/ d*7 TWojC- II j Xdtsr
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 159 (Friday, August 15, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 48003]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18911]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i> 11342]


Texas Disaster Number TX-00298

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 1.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Texas (FEMA-
1780-DR), dated 07/24/2008.
    Incident: Hurricane Dolly.
    Incident Period: 07/22/2008 through 08/01/2008.
    Effective Date: 08/01/2008.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 09/22/2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: M. Mitravich, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for Private Non-Profit organizations in the State of Texas, 
dated 07/24/2008, is hereby amended to establish the incident period 
for this disaster as beginning 07/22/2008 and continuing through 08/01/
2008.
    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Herbert L. Mitchell,
Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-18911 Filed 8-14-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-02-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-05-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-03-1998
<CASH>                                           2,429
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,994
<ALLOWANCES>                                       412
<INVENTORY>                                     13,202
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                33,667
<PP&E>                                          15,899
<DEPRECIATION>                                (10,585)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  39,514
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           14,237
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            33
<OTHER-SE>                                      24,831
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    39,514
<SALES>                                         32,529
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                32,529
<CGS>                                           22,322
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   22,322
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 8,550
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (19)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,676
<INCOME-TAX>                                       620
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,056
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,056
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.36
        

</TABLE>
#### J. B. Barnes v. State.

No. 24991.

November 22, 1950.

*Chas. H. Dean,*Plainview, for appellant.

*George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

*256BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

Appellant was assessed a fine of $250.00 by a jury verdict on a charge of possessing liquor for the purpose of sale.

When the jury was impanelled the county attorney began reading the complaint to the jury, instead of the information. Defendant duly objected to the reading of the complaint. The court overruled his objection, to which defendant excepted.

The complaint is an affidavit which is hearsay evidence and not admissible in evidence. The pleading in the case is the information filed by the county attorney. It should be perfectly clear, as we have often held, that the complaint should not be read to the jury.

For the error discussed the judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause is remanded.
#### Lemuel Hudson v. State.

No. 25194.

March 7, 1951.

*Fred C. Chandler,*Colorado City, for appellant.

*George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

GRAVES, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of a violation of the liquor laws and by the jury assessed a penalty of a fine of $300.00 and 60 days in jail, and he appeals.

*486There is a statement of facts in the record but same appears never to have been filed in the lower court and therefore cannot be considered by us.

It is also shown by the caption of the transcript herein that the term of court in which this cause was tried adjourned on August 31, 1950; that notice of appeal was given on September 6, 1950; and that a recognizance was entered into on September 26, 1950. Such recognizance entered into after the adjournment of the term of court at which the conviction was had was invalid and requires a dismissal of the appeal. See Jones v. State, 31 S.W. (2d) 644.

There are no bills of exception in the record.

Because of the defect mentioned, the appeal will be dismissed.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

ALBA MORALES,

Appellant,

v.

NAJEEB IQBAL, AS TRUSTEE OF GRANTOR TRUST #660 U/A/D 

07/07/2017,

Appellee.

No. 4D22-1852

[June 14, 2023]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Carlos A. Rodriguez, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

CACE20013767.

Carlos A. Ziegenhirt of Carlos A. Ziegenhirt, P.A., Miami, for appellant.

Matthew M. Slowik of Matthew M. Slowik, P.A., Coral Springs, for 

appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Alba Morales appeals the trial court’s final summary judgment in favor 

of Najeeb Iqbal as Trustee of Grantor Trust # 660 U/A/D 07/07/2017. We 

affirm. However, because the record reflects the real property that was the 

subject of the action for specific performance was conveyed to a third 

party, this cause “is remanded to the trial court for a determination as to 

whether a decree of specific performance can be rendered in light of such 

conveyance.” Nat’l Indus. Bank of Miami v. Forbes, 270 So. 2d 426, 426–

27 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972). If the trial court finds specific performance 

impossible, it should then conduct an evidentiary hearing on whether an

award of damages under appellee’s other claims is appropriate. See id. at 

427 (“Should the trial court find that it is impossible to grant the equitable 

relief requested then in that event the trial court shall be authorized to 

conduct an evidentiary hearing for the purpose of ascertaining and 

awarding damages incidental to the main relief sought.”); Camp v. Parks, 

314 So. 2d 611, 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975) (finding specific performance was 

impossible, so the order was “reversed and the cause remanded with 
2

respectful instructions to allow plaintiff to seek money damages for breach 

of contract”).

Affirmed and remanded with instructions.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., GROSS and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

F ROM THE F IRST C OURT OF A PPEALS

N O

. 01

- 11 -00258- CR

J EREMY T HOMAS

A PPELLANT On Appeal from Cause Number 1284896

From the 177th District Court of Harris County

V.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS

A PPELLEE



### Appellant ’s Motion To Extend Time

To File Petition For Discretionary Review

T O T HE H ONORABLE J UDGES O F T HE C OURT O F C RIMINAL A PPEALS :

C OMES N OW

, J EREMY T HOMAS , and files this his Motion to Extend Time to File Petition for Discretionary Review, and in support thereof, would respectfully show the Court the following:

I. The First Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment in Thomas v. State, 01

- 11

- 00258

- CR, 2015 WL 4101164 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] July 7, 2015)

. No motion for rehearing was filed. No other motions for extension have been filed.

II. In compliance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 68.2(c), this motion for extension is timely filed within 15 days of the deadline for the PDR, which was August 6, 2015. Appellant requests this extension due to the fact that counsel for Appellant has been engaged in work in the Harris County Public Defender’s Office on many cases, including the following:

 Ajah Foster

, PD

- 0963

- 15

 Domingo Medina, 01

- 15

- 00574

- CR

 Kori Henegar, 14

- 15 -00529- CR

 Trey Foster, 14

- 15

- 00496

- CR

 Hugo Pachas-Luna, 01

- 14

- 00516

- CR

- 01

- 14 -00520- CR

 Rodney Robins, 01

- 14 -00582- CR

 Stephen Hopper, 14

- 15 -00371- CR PD-1086-15

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 8/19/2015 5:46:18 PM Accepted 8/20/2015 2:05:59 PM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK Pete Rodriguez, 14

- 15

- 00339

- CR

 V incent Williams, 14

- 15

- 00220

- CR

 Darryle Robertson, 14

- 15

- 00132

- CR

 Counsel has been researching and writing for several trial cases assigned to the Public

Defender’s Office Trial Division.

III. Appellant ’s attorney requests this brief extension which is necessary so that the petition can be thoro ughly written and timely filed. This motion is not made for the purpose of delay.

PRAYER

W HEREFORE

, P REMISES C ONSIDERED

, Appellant prays that this Honorable Cou rt grants this requested extensi on of time to file the appellant’s petition for discretionary review in the above

cause and extend the time for filing for 30 days, to September 6 , 2015.

Respectfully submitted,

A LEXANDER B UNIN

Chief Public Defender

Harri s County, Texas

/s/Sarah V. Wood

S ARAH V. W OOD

Assistant Public Defender Harris County, Texas

Texas Bar Number 24048898
1201 Franklin, 13 th Floor

Houston Texas 77002 713.368.0016 (phone) 713.368.9278 (fax) Sarah.Wood@pdo.hctx.net

Attorney for Appellant

C ERTIFICATE OF S ERVICE By my signature below, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of t h e above and foregoing Appellant ’s Motion to Extend Time to File Petition for Discretionary Review has been served on the District Attorney of Harris County, Texas, by electronic delivery through the efile

system.

/s/Sarah V. Wood

Sarah V. Wood
cnk-ex41_83.htm



Exhibit 4.1

 

DESCRIPTION OF REGISTRANT’S SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Cinemark Holdings, Inc. has one class of Common Stock registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.  

Description of Common Stock

The following description of our Common Stock is a summary and does not purport to be complete. It is subject to and qualified in its entirety by reference to our Second Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation, our Amended and Restated Bylaws and the Delaware General Corporation Law.

Our authorized capital stock consists of 5,000,000 shares of preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share, and 300,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.001 per share. We have no shares of preferred stock issued and outstanding. 

Our common stockholders are entitled to one vote for each share held. Our common stockholders do not have cumulative voting rights. Subject to the rights of holders of any then outstanding shares of our preferred stock, our common stockholders are entitled to any dividends that may be declared by our Board of Directors, in its discretion, out of funds legally available for the payment of dividends. Holders of our common stock are entitled to share ratably in our net assets upon our dissolution or liquidation after payment or provision for all liabilities and any preferential liquidation rights of our preferred stock then outstanding. The shares of our common stock are not subject to any redemption provisions and are not convertible into any other shares of our capital stock. The rights, preferences and privileges of holders of our common stock will be subject to those of the holders of any shares of our preferred stock we may issue in the future.
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350




In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Lightning Gaming, Inc. (the
“Registrant”) for the period ending June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Brian Haveson,
Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, and I, Robert Ciunci, Chief Financial
Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350  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 results of operations of the
      Registrant at the dates and for the periods
  indicated.




A
signed original of this written statement, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement, has been provided to
the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





This
Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities
and Exchange Commission.





Date: 
August 14, 2008


By: 
/s/ Brian Haveson





Brian
Haveson


Chief
Executive Officer








Date: 
August 14, 2008


By: 
/s/ Robert Ciunci


Robert
Ciunci


Chief
Financial Officer