SecProbe.io

CORRESP
1
filename1.htm

  SILLS CUMMIS EPSTEIN & GROSS

  A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

  The Legal Center

  One Riverfront Plaza

  Newark, New Jersey 07102-5400

  Tel: 973-643-7000

  Fax: 973-643-6500

  Robert
  Crane

  Member
  of the Firm

  Direct
  Dial:  (973) 643-5055

  E-mail:
  mcrane@sillscummis.com

  30 Rockefeller Plaza

  New York, NY 10112

  Tel: 212-643-7000

  Fax: 212-643-6500

September 8, 2005

VIA
FACSIMILE

Securities and
Exchange Commission

Division of
Corporation Finance

100 F Street,
N.E.

Washington,
D.C. 20549

  Attention:

  Barbara C.
  Jacobs

  Mark P.
  Shuman

  Nicholas
  Panos

  Adam Halper

  Re:

  Computer
  Horizons Corp.

  Preliminary Proxy Statement of Crescendo Partners II L.P., Series R

  Filed:  August 19, 2005

  File No.:   000-07282

  Schedule 13D of Crescendo Partners II L.P., Series R

  Filed:  July 22, 2005

Dear Sirs and Madam:

This letter sets
forth additional comments of Computer Horizons Corp., a New York corporation (“CHC”),
to the amended Preliminary Proxy Statement of Crescendo Partners II L.P.,
Series R and others (collectively, “Crescendo”) filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) on September 2, 2005 (the “Amended
Preliminary Proxy Statement”) and the Schedule 13D filed by Crescendo with the
Commission on July 22, 2005, as subsequently amended (the “Schedule 13D”).  We have been authorized by the Company to
provide the comments contained in this letter on behalf of the Company.  Unless otherwise noted, references in the
text of the comments herein to page numbers are to the version of the Amended
Preliminary Proxy Statement filed via EDGAR by Crescendo.

•                  The
Amended Preliminary Proxy Statement contains extensive discussion about a
proposed merger with Analysts International Corporation, the anticipated
transaction costs relating thereto, and the possible reconfiguration of CHC’s
Board in connection with the proposed merger, all of which is now moot.  The Amended Preliminary Proxy Statement needs
to be updated in order to prevent shareholder confusion.  All stale and extraneous information relating
to the proposed merger should be deleted.

•                  Page
6.  Crescendo states that “[Crescendo’s] counsel responded, requesting that Computer Horizons
announce the record date required to be set by the Company’s By-laws”.  This is an inaccurate statement which should
be corrected.  In fact, by letter dated
August 16, 2005, Crescendo’s counsel requested that CHC “notify us of the record date” (emphasis added).  This was considered to be an improper request
for inside information prior to disclosure to all shareholders.

•                  Page
10.  Crescendo states that “WE BELIEVE
THERE ARE POTENTIALLY MORE FAVORABLE OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMPUTER HORIZONS THAN
THE PROPOSED MERGER.”  If there is a
basis for such statement, the basis should be disclosed.  Otherwise, the statement should be removed.  Similarly, at page 16, Crescendo suggests
that it already has value enhancing plans.
If this is true, the nature of the “plans” should be disclosed.  Otherwise, the statement should be removed
since there appears to be no basis for this statement.

•                  Page
13.  In Proposals No. 2 and No. 3,
Crescendo proposes that CHC’s shareholders fix the number of directors at five
and elect five persons who have been specifically identified as Crescendo’s
director nominees.  In its proposed proxy
card, Crescendo requests proxies to elect the same five identified director
nominees.  However, at page 17 (and only
at page 17), Crescendo purports to reserve the right, under certain
circumstances, to use its proxies to vote for substitute nominees and to
nominate additional directors.  These
purported reservations of rights are inconsistent with the purposes for the
special meeting of shareholders as specifically set forth in Crescendo’s
request for the meeting; they are also inconsistent with the Proposals made in
the Amended Preliminary Proxy Statement (including in the proposed proxy
card).  Thus, all references to such
reservations of rights should be deleted from the Amended Preliminary Proxy
Statement.  If any of these references
remain in the Amended Preliminary Proxy Statement, Crescendo should disclose
information about any substitute and/or additional nominees consistent with the
disclosure required by Schedule 14A regarding directors.  No statement is made as to whether disclosure
of the identities and credentials of any such substitute or additional nominees
would be made on a timely basis in order for CHC’s shareholders to have the
opportunity to make an informed decision about removing all incumbent directors
and replacing them with Crescendo’s nominees.

•                  Page
17.  Crescendo states that “[t]he Nominees will not receive any compensation from [Crescendo] for
their services as directors of Computer Horizons.”  Crescendo should disclose whether any member
of Crescendo (or an affiliate thereof) has agreed to compensate any of the
Crescendo director nominees, whether or not any such compensation has been
nominally tied to any such nominee’s agreement to stand for

2

election.
Crescendo should also disclose whether any compensation has been
offered, given or agreed to by given by it or any of its affiliates to any
other member of the Crescendo group.

•                  Page
18.  Crescendo states that “If the Nominees are elected, [Crescendo intends] to review each of the
SERPs and employment agreements . . . and evaluate whether the change of
control provisions contained therein have been triggered.”  This is misleading in several respects.  First, it suggests that $14.12 million of
change in control costs might not be triggered if CHC’s entire Board is
replaced.  Second, it suggests that
Crescendo has not reviewed those SERPs and employment agreements that are
publicly available.  Crescendo should be
required to acknowledge that it has reviewed such documents, and disclose any
basis for suggesting that change in control payments would not be triggered
thereunder if CHC’s Board is replaced.

•                  Page
22.  Crescendo states that “The entire expense of soliciting proxies is being borne by[Crescendo]
.…”  However, on page 23,
Crescendo states that “[Crescendo] intends to
seek reimbursement from Computer Horizons of all expenses it incurs in
connection with the Solicitations.”
The disclosure on page 22 should be clarified to explain this
inconsistency, and the approximate expenses should be disclosed.

We hope this assists you
in your evaluation process.  Please do
not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

  Very truly yours,

  /s/Robert Max Crane

  Robert Max Crane

cc:           William J. Murphy

Michael C. Caulfield, Esq.

3