alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.2











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 Marine Growth Ventures, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended    December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Katherine A Ostruszka, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section     1350 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 Company.





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





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section     1350 and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.











Date:  March 30, 2010
By:
/s/ Katherine A OstruszkaKatherine A Ostruszka

Chief Financial Officer & Controller

(Principal Financial & AccountingOfficer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       3,688,556
<SECURITIES>                                 3,765,367
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,388,765
<ALLOWANCES>                                   156,212
<INVENTORY>                                  2,496,225
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,858,902
<PP&E>                                       1,508,459
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,072,279
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              19,253,993
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,171,406
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    35,514,262
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,834,321
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                19,253,993
<SALES>                                      3,887,018
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,887,018
<CGS>                                        2,708,838
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,467,947
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                68,661
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               156,212
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              68,661
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,649,590)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,649,590)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,649,590)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .46
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                AMENDMENT NO. 2
                                       TO
                              EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
                                    BETWEEN
            HEALTHCARE IMAGING SERVICES, INC. AND ELLIOTT H. VERNON

         AGREEMENT, dated as of January 30, 1997, between HEALTHCARE IMAGING
SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation ("HIS"), and ELLIOTT H. VERNON ("EHV").

                             W I T N E S S E T H :

         WHEREAS, HIS and EHV are parties to an employment agreement, dated as
of October 22, 1991, as amended by Amendment No. 1 dated as of February 1, 1996
(the "Employment Agreement;" all capitalized terms used herein but not
otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings ascribed thereto in
the Employment Agreement); and

         WHEREAS, HIS and EHV wish to extend the term of the Employment
Agreement upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein.

         NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants
herein contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
adequacy of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:

         1. Section 2 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended to extend
the Term for an additional one (1) year (the "Extended Term") and, accordingly,
the Employment Agreement shall terminate on October 22, 1998. All references to
"Term" in the Employment Agreement shall be deemed to include the Extended
Term. During the Extended Term, EHV's base annual salary, payable at such
intervals as the other senior executives of HIS are paid, shall remain at
$100,000.

         2. Except as set forth herein, the Employment Agreement shall remain
in full force and effect.

         3. This Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties
hereto, and their respective successors, assigns, heirs and personal
representatives.

         4. The validity, interpretation, construction, performance and
enforcement of this Agreement shall be governed by the internal laws of the
State of New Jersey, without regard to its conflicts of law rules.

         5. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, which
together shall constitute one agreement.



<PAGE>


         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as
of the date first written above.


                                            HEALTHCARE IMAGING SERVICES, INC.


                                            By:  /s/ Elliott H. Vernon
                                                -------------------------------
                                                     Name:
                                                     Title:


                                            /s/ Elliott H. Vernon
                                            -----------------------------------
                                            ELLIOTT H. VERNON



                                       2
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 76 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 76

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 22, 2000

Received and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
                                Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
    Recognizing the social problem of child abuse and neglect, and 
         supporting efforts to enhance public awareness of it.

Whereas more than 3,000,000 American children are reported as suspected victims 
        of child abuse and neglect annually;
Whereas more than 500,000 American children are unable to live safely with their 
        families and are placed in foster homes and institutions;
Whereas it is estimated that more than 1,000 children, 78 percent under the age 
        of 5 and 38 percent under the age of 1, lose their lives as a direct 
        result of abuse and neglect every year in America;
Whereas this tragic social problem results in human and economic costs due to 
        its relationship to crime and delinquency, drug and alcohol abuse, 
        domestic violence, and welfare dependency; and
Whereas Childhelp USA has initiated a ``Day of Hope'' to be observed on the 
        first Wednesday in April, during Child Abuse Prevention Month, to focus 
        public awareness on this social ill: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That--
            (1) it is the sense of the Congress that--
                    (A) all Americans should keep these victimized 
                children in their thoughts and prayers;
                    (B) all Americans should seek to break this cycle 
                of abuse and neglect, and give our children hope for 
                the future; and
                    (C) the faith community, nonprofit organizations, 
                and volunteers across America should recommit 
                themselves and mobilize their resources to assist these 
                children; and
            (2) the Congress--
                    (A) supports the goals and ideas of the ``Day of 
                Hope''; and
                    (B) commends Childhelp USA for its efforts on 
                behalf of abused and neglected children everywhere.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 14, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
# L_2022190EN.01000501.xml

| 19.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 190/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 190/5

---

COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/1231

of 18 July 2022

implementing Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 of 18 May 2006 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Belarus and the involvement of Belarus in the Russian aggression against Ukraine (1), and in particular Article 8a(3) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 18 May 2006, the Council adopted Regulation (EC) No 765/2006. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 18 May 2006, the Council adopted Regulation (EC) No 765/2006.

| (2) | Further to an evaluation of the relevant circumstances, one entry should be deleted from the list of natural and legal persons, entities and bodies set out in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 765/2006. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Further to an evaluation of the relevant circumstances, one entry should be deleted from the list of natural and legal persons, entities and bodies set out in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 765/2006.

| (3) | Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 765/2006 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the date following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 18 July 2022.

For the Council

The President

J. BORRELL FONTELLES

---

(1)  
  OJ L 134, 20.5.2006, p. 1.

1

---

ANNEX

The following entry is deleted from the list set out in Section B (‘Legal persons, entities and bodies referred to in Article 2(1)’) of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 765/2006:

| ‘23. | Cham Wings Airlines’. |
| --- | --- |

‘23.

Cham Wings Airlines’.

---
No. 65320.

#### The Durst Manufacturing Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 320248-K and 59/1436 (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of “Twin Mix” the same in all material respects as the merchandise the subject of *The Durst Manufacturing Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 280, C.D. 2142), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Before Judge Watson,

August 17, 1967

No. R67/95.

#### Dana Parfumes Corporation et al. *v.*United States, reappraisements R64/6641, etc. (New York).

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *Gehrig Hoban & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(57 Cust. Ct. 727, A.R.D. 210), the court found and held that cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402a(f), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplication Act of. 1956, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the “Canoe” cologne here involved and that said cost of production per *920bottle of the involved merchandise is as stated in schedule “B,” said schedule “B” being attached and made a part of the decision, plus the *pro rata,*share of the cost of packing as indicated on the invoices.
Judith Cartwright 9908 Laurel Dr. Douglasville, GA 30135-1618 March 6,2010
The Honorable Ray LaHood SecretaryofTransportation 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Washington, DC 20590
.Re: Retirees S\lPP.9rtDelta'sJianedaApplicatioll . Dear Secretary LaHood: Dear Secretary LaHood: Delta Air Lines has submitted an application to provide new nonstop service from the U.S. to Tokyo's Haneda airport. As a retired employee ofDelta, I enthusiastically supportthis application. Under the new aviation agreement with Japan, Haneda will bereopened to U.s. carriers for the fmal time since 1976. Because ofits convenient location near central Tokyo, Haneda is the preferred airport for business travelers. Delta employees, and many ofits retirees, have worked for many years to build Delta's business in Japan, and no U.S. airline has invested more in Tokyo than Delta. Delta has a strong record ofcompetitive trans-Pacific service. Butthe reopening ofHanedawill putthatinvestment andDeltajobs at risk ifthey are unable to compete. Delta's major competitors, the Star and oneworld Alliances, have Japanese partners that dominate service at Haneda. Delta, which does not have a Japanese partner, would be at a serious disadvantage unless it is given the opportunity to compete atHaneda. IfDelta 

### is provided with the Haneda slots they need, all three ofthe major airline alliances
- SkyTeam, Star and oneworld
- will be able to compete on a level playing field. That new competition would provide tremendous benefits for Delta's customers and Delta's employees. I urgeyou to approve Delta's application and providethe frequencies proposedto serve Haneda from Seattle, Detroit, Los Angeles and Honolulu. Sincerely,
**Exhibit 21.1** **Subsidiaries    of the Registrant**     Certain subsidiaries of the Registrant and their subsidiaries    are listed below. The names of certain subsidiaries, which    considered in the aggregate would not constitute a significant    subsidiary, have been omitted.    **Name** **Country of Organization**     Avanade Europe Holdings Ltd.      United Kingdom    Avanade Europe Services Ltd.      United Kingdom    Avanade Holdings LLC      Delaware    Avanade International Corporation     Delaware    Avanade Asia Pte. Ltd.      Singapore    Avanade Australia Pty Ltd.      Australia    Avanade Belgium SPRL     Belgium    Avanade Canada Inc.      Canada    Avanade Denmark ApS     Denmark    Avanade Deutschland GmbH     Germany    Avanade Finland Oy     Finland    Avanade France SAS     France    Avanade Italy SRL     Italy    Avanade Japan K.K.      Japan    Avanade Malaysia Sdn. Bhd.      Malaysia    Avanade Netherlands B.V.      Netherlands    Avanade Norway AS     Norway    Avanade Spain, S.L.      Spain    Avanade Sweden AB     Sweden    Avanade Schweiz GmbH     Switzerland    Avanade (Thailand) Co., Ltd.      Thailand    Avanade UK Ltd.      United Kingdom    Guangzhou Avanade Computer Technology Development Company    Ltd.      China
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 5 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 5

Recognizing the severity of the issue of cervical health, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 6, 1999

 Ms. Millender-McDonald submitted the following concurrent resolution; 
            which was referred to the Committee on Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Recognizing the severity of the issue of cervical health, and for other 
                               purposes.

Whereas cervical cancer annually strikes an estimated 15,000 women in the United 
        States;
Whereas during an average woman's lifetime cervical cancer strikes one out of 
        every 50 American women;
Whereas it is estimated that during this decade more than 150,000 women will be 
        diagnosed with cervical cancer in the United States;
Whereas according to the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program of 
        the National Cancer Institute, when cervical cancer is detected at an 
        early stage, the five-year survival rate is 91 percent;
Whereas cervical cancer is a preventable disease yet is one of the leading 
        causes of death among American women;
Whereas according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the 
        mortality rate among American women with cervical cancer declined during 
        the period 1960 through 1997, but now has begun to rise; and
Whereas cervical cancer survivors have shown tremendous courage and 
        determination in the face of adversity: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress--
            (1) recognizes the severity of the issue of cervical 
        health;
            (2) calls on the Unites States as a whole to support both 
        the individuals with cervical cancer as well as the family and 
        loved ones of individuals with cervical cancer through public 
        awareness and education; and
            (3) calls on the people of the United States to take this 
        opportunity to learn about cervical cancer and how they can 
        lower their likelihood for developing cervical cancer and 
        ensure early detection.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7940

GERALD COSTELLO WATKINS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

JON P. GALLEY; JOSEPH CURRAN, JR., The

Attorney General of the State of Maryland,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (1:06-cv00910-AMD)

Submitted: April 26, 2007 Decided: May 1, 2007

Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gerald Costello Watkins, Appellant Pro Se. Edward John Kelley,

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland,

for Appellees.

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

PER CURIAM:

Gerald Costello Watkins seeks to appeal the district

court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000)

petition. 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 Watkins has not

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

appealability 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
IV

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 344

Permitting the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for a ceremony to present

the Congressional Gold Medal to Father Theodore Hesburgh.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 6, 2000

Mr. ROEMER submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on House Administration

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Permitting the use of the rotunda of the Capitol for a ceremony to present the Congressional Gold Medal to Father

Theodore Hesburgh.

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That the rotunda of the Capitol may be used

3 on July 13, 2000, for a ceremony to present the Congres4 sional Gold Medal to Father Theodore Hesburgh. Physical

5 preparations for the ceremony shall be carried out in ac6 cordance with such conditions as the Architect of the Cap7 itol may prescribe.

Æ
March 21, 1961

No. 65327.

#### Belf & Lustig, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/33139, etc.

Protests abandoned February 6, 1961. (Not published.) (Initial No. 202147-K.) Plaintiffs’ application for rehearing denied by Lawrence, J., and Ford, J.

Rao, J., dissented.