alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 12.2 

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Patrick Flynn, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of ING Groep N.V.; 

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 underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3. Based on my knowledge, thefinancial 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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The company’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company and have: 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the company, 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) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to bedesigned under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; 

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. The company’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and the audit committee of the company’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the company’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 company’sinternal control over financial reporting. 

Date: March 12, 2012
Exhibit 23.2

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITOR

            We hereby consent to the inclusion in this Annual Report on Form
10-KSB of our Report dated February 28, 1998 (the "Report"), on our audit of the
financial statements of 800 Travel Systems, Inc. as of December 31, 1997 and for
the year ended December 31, 1997, and to all references to our Firm included in
this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB.

            We hereby also consent to the incorporation by reference of the
Report in the Registration Statement of 800 Travel Systems, Inc. on Form S-8
(File No. 333-69873).

                                          KILLMAN, MURRELL & COMPANY, P.C.

                                      /s/ Killman, Murrell & Company, P.C.

Dallas, Texas

Dated: March 31, 1999
Case 3:00-cv-01649-L Document 89 Filed 11/05/04 Page 1 of 2 PageID 118
Case 3:00-cv-01649-L Document 89 Filed 11/05/04 Page 2 of 2 PageID 119
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 993 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 993

 To prohibit certain business concerns from receiving assistance from 
       the Small Business Administration, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 25, 2021

  Mr. Rubio (for himself, Ms. Ernst, and Mr. Kennedy) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                  Small Business and Entrepreneurship

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit certain business concerns from receiving assistance from 
       the Small Business Administration, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Preventing SBA Assistance from Going 
to China Act of 2021''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON AFFILIATION WITH THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA.

    (a) In General.--Section 3(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
632(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(10) Prohibition on affiliation with the people's 
        republic of china.--For purposes of this Act, a small business 
        concern may not--
                    ``(A) be headquartered in the People's Republic of 
                China; or
                    ``(B) have more than 25 percent of the voting stock 
                of the small business concern owned by affiliates that 
                are citizens of the People's Republic of China.''.
    (b) Regulations and Guidance.--The Administrator of the Small 
Business Administration shall amend the regulations and guidance of the 
Administration, including sections 120.100, 120.110, and 121.105 of 
title 13, Code of Federal Regulations, to carry out the amendment made 
by this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Verna Eileen ROBERTSON, Appellant, v. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Indenture Trustee FOR CIM TRUST 2015-4AG MORTGAGE-BACKED NOTES SERIES 2015-4AG, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4425

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 24, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

PAUL DEAN ROACH )

)

V. ) 3-05-CV-2439-P

)

NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, Director, )

Texas Department of Criminal Justice )

Correctional Institutions Division )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

United States Magistrate Judge William F. Sanderson, Jr., made findings, conclusions

and a recommendation in this case. No objections were filed. The District Court reviewed the

proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the Court

accepts the Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.

SO ORDERED this 7 day of September 2006. th

_________________________________

JORGE A. SOLIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:05-cv-02439-P Document 19 Filed 09/08/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 69
#### James E. Hendry and Robert A. Henderson, Sr., *Appellants,*v. Frank Kellow, L. A. Wingate, A. E. Raymond, A. B. Cutter, and Dr. H. E. Parnell, as Commissioner of the City of Fort Myers, Florida, a Municipality, and G. E. Snell and C. Perry Snell, Heretofore Doing Business Under the Partnership Name of Snell Brothers, *Appellees.*

Division B.

Opinion Filed June 15, 1927.

Petition for Rehearing Denied October 24, 1927.

*Louis A. Hendry,*Attorney for Appellants;

*Campbell & Campbell,*for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

Appellants as complainants below filed their amended bill of complaint against appellees seeking to enjoin the city of Fort Myers from paying Snell Brothers for certain improvements contracted by them to be performed on behalf of said City August 12, 1924. Resistance to payment for said improvements is predicated on the ground that they were made in “Valencia Terrace,” a subdivision outside the city limits of Fort Myers. It appears that subsequent to making the contract for the im*24provements brought in question the Legislature of Florida by Chapter 10563, Acts of 1925, enlarged the city limits of Fort Myers to include “Valencia Terrace” and validated all contracts with reference thereto.

The demurrer on behalf of the city of Fort Myers to the amended bill of complaint was sustained, injunction was denied and the cause comes here on appeal from that order.

Even if the contract with Snell Brothers was invalid in its inception it was one that the Legislature was fully authorized to approve and validate which was accomplished by Chapter 10563, Acts of 1925, so the decree of the chancellor is affirmed on authority of Jacksonville v. Basnett, 20 Fla. 525; Smith v. Lange, 20 Fla. 697; Parker v. Jacksonville, 37 Fla. 342, 20 So. 538; Cranor v. Volusia County, 54 Fla. 526, 45 So. 455; Camp v. State, 71 Fla. 381, 72 So. 483; Charlotte Harbor & N. R. Co. v. Wells, 78 Fla. 227, 82 So. 770.

Affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.

Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion.
IIA 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 3 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United 

States Code, of the rule submitted by the Internal Revenue Service 

relating to ‘‘Gross Proceeds Reporting by Brokers That Regularly Provide Services Effectuating Digital Asset Sales’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 21, 2025 

Mr. CRUZ (for himself, Ms. LUMMIS, Mr. HAGERTY, Mr. TILLIS, Mr. 

SHEEHY, and Mr. BUDD) introduced the following joint resolution; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of 

title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by 

the Internal Revenue Service relating to ‘‘Gross Proceeds 

Reporting by Brokers That Regularly Provide Services 

Effectuating Digital Asset Sales’’. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the In4 ternal Revenue Service relating to ‘‘Gross Proceeds Re5 porting by Brokers That Regularly Provide Services Effec6 tuating Digital Asset Sales’’ (89 Fed. Reg. 106928 (DeVerDate Sep 11 2014 23:28 Jan 21, 2025 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\SJ3.IS SJ3

ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•SJ 3 IS 

1 cember 30, 2024)), and such rule shall have no force or 

2 effect. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
# C_2017402EN.01001801.xml

| 27.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 402/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 402/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam (Netherlands) lodged on 28 September 2017 — Openbaar Ministerie v Samet Ardic

(Case C-571/17)

(2017/C 402/22)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Rechtbank Amsterdam

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Openbaar Ministerie

Applicant:

Defendant: Samet Ardic

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

If the requested person has been found guilty in final proceedings conducted in his presence and has had imposed on him a custodial sentence, the execution of which has been suspended subject to certain conditions, do subsequent proceedings in which the court, in the absence of the requested person, orders that suspension to be revoked on the ground of non-compliance with conditions and evasion of the supervision and guidance of a probation officer constitute a ‘trial resulting in the decision’ as referred to in Article 4a of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA (1)?

1

---

(1)  Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ 2002 L 190, p. 1).

1

---
# C_2018052EN.01002301.xml

| 12.2.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 52/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.2.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52/23

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato lodged on 30 November 2017 — Ministero della Salute v Hannes Preindl

(Case C-675/17)

(2018/C 052/33)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Ministero della Salute

Appellant:

Respondent: Hannes Preindl

Respondent:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Do Articles 21, 22 and 24 of the Directive (1) require a Member State, in which the full-time training requirement is in force, and the corresponding ban on enrolling in two degree courses at the same time, automatically to recognise qualifications obtained in the home Member State simultaneously or during periods that in part overlap. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Do Articles 21, 22 and 24 of the Directive (1) require a Member State, in which the full-time training requirement is in force, and the corresponding ban on enrolling in two degree courses at the same time, automatically to recognise qualifications obtained in the home Member State simultaneously or during periods that in part overlap.

1

| 2. | If so, can Article 22(a) and Article 21 of the Directive be interpreted to the effect that the authorities in the Member State from which recognition is sought may nevertheless ascertain whether the condition that the overall duration, level and quality of such training should not be lower than those of continuous full-time training is satisfied. |
| --- | --- |

2.

If so, can Article 22(a) and Article 21 of the Directive be interpreted to the effect that the authorities in the Member State from which recognition is sought may nevertheless ascertain whether the condition that the overall duration, level and quality of such training should not be lower than those of continuous full-time training is satisfied.

the overall duration, level and quality of such training should not be lower than those of continuous full-time training

---

(1)  Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ L 255, p. 22).

1

---