Legal and Regulatory Matters On December 28, 2011, a complaint was filed in Arizona Superior Court, captioned Israni v. RSC Holdings Inc., CV20 11-020579, on behalf of a putative class of RSC's stockholders against RSC, each member of the RSC board, certain of RSC's officers, and the Company challenging the merger. In an amended complaint, filed February 24, 2012, plaintiff alleged, among other things, that the directors and officers of RSC breached their fiduciary duties by allegedly agreeing to sell RSC at an unfair and inadequate price and by allegedly failing to take steps to maximize the sale price of RSC. The complaint also alleged that RSC and the Company aided and abetted in the directors' and officers' breach of their fiduciary duties, and that the defendants' public disclosures concerning the merger have been inaccurate or incomplete. On April 19, 2012, without agreeing that any of the claims had merit, the parties reached an agreement to settle the action, pursuant to which RSC and the Company agreed to make certain additional public disclosures regarding the merger and to pay certain attorneys' fees awarded by the court. On August 27, 2012, the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement and on September 28, 2012, the settlement was approved by the court. As previously reported, following our August 2004 announcement that the SEC had commenced a non-public, fact-finding inquiry concerning the Company, an alleged stockholder filed an action in Connecticut State Superior Court, Judicial District of Norwalk/Stamford at Stamford, purportedly suing derivatively on the Company's behalf. The action, entitled Gregory Riegel v. John N. Milne, et al., named as defendants certain of our current and/or former directors and/or officers, and named the Company as a nominal defendant. The complaint asserted, among other things, that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties to the Company by causing or allowing the Company to disseminate misleading and inaccurate information to stockholders and the mark