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

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Quarterly  Report of Enclaves  Group,  Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006, as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Mark D. MacFarlane,  Chief Operating  Officer and acting Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 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.

     Dated: November 16, 2006                   /s/ Mark D. MacFarlane
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                                    Mark D. MacFarlane
                                        Chief Operating Officer and acting Chief
                                                    Financial Officer

A signed  original of this  certification  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.
```
**Exhibit 31.2****SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION**I, James Liggett, Principal Financial Officer of enherent Corp., certify that:1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of enherent Corp.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing 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 theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   /s/ James Liggett  James Liggett  Principal Financial Officer     August12, 2005
**Exhibit 31.1****SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION**I, Pamela Fredette, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of enherent Corp., certifythat:1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of enherent Corp.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing 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 theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.   /s/ Pamela Fredette  Pamela Fredette  Chairman,Chief Executive Officer and
Case 1:07-cv-05338-AKH Document 25 Filed 06/04/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-05338-AKH Document 25 Filed 06/04/2008 Page 2 of 2
# CE2010212EN.01034701.xml

| 5.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 212/347 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 212/347

---

Thursday 7 May 2009European Refugee Fund for the period 2008-2013 (amendment of Decision No 573/2007/EC) ***I

P6_TA(2009)0375

European Parliament legislative resolution of 7 May 2009 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 573/2007/EC establishing the European Refugee Fund for the period 2008 to 2013 by removing funding for certain Community actions and altering the limit for funding such actions (COM(2009)0067 – C6-0070/2009 – 2009/0026(COD))

2010/C 212 E/50

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2009)0067),

having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 63, first paragraph, point 2(b) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0070/2009),

having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A6-0280/2009),

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission proposal;

| 2. | Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend its proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

| 3. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission.

---
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-92,067-03

EX P ARTE JAMES LOUIS LANG E II, App licant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 16-2213-CR -B-A-B IN THE 25TH DIS TRICT COURT

F ROM G UADALUP E COUNTY

Per curiam . O R D E R Applicant was convicted of two counts of ag g rava ted sexual assault of a child and sentenc ed to fifty y ear s’ imprisonment. Applicant did not appea l his convictio n . Applicant filed this application for a writ of habea s corpus in the county of conviction, and the district cler k forwa rded it to thi s Court. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07. Applicant contends, among other things, that his plea was inv o l untary beca use he was incompetent at the time he pleade d g uilty

. Applicant has alleg ed fac ts that, if true, might entitle him to relief

. Brady v. United States , 397 U.S. 742 (1970). Acc ording ly , the rec ord should be develope d. The trial c ourt is the appropriate forum for findings of fac t. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(d). The trial court shall order trial counsel to respond to Applicant’s cl ai m . I n d ev elopi ng the2

rec ord, the trial court may use any means set out in Article 11.07, § 3(d). I f the trial court elec ts to hold a hear ing, it shall deter mine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Applicant is indige nt and wants to be represe nted by counsel, the t rial court shall appoint counsel to repr esent him at t he hearing

. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. I f counsel is appointed or reta ined, the trial co u rt s h al l immediately

notify this Court of counsel’s name

. The trial court shall make finding s of fac t and conclusions of law as to whether Applicant’s plea was involuntary

. The trial court shall also make specific finding s as to whether Applicant was competent to plead g uilty

. The trial court may make any other finding s and conclusions that it deems appropr iate in re sponse to Applicant’s c laim. The trial court shall make findings o f fa ct and conclusions of law withi n ninety day s from the date of this order

. The district cler k shall then immediately forwa rd to this Court the trial court’s finding s and conclusions and the rec ord develope d on rema nd, including, among other things, aff idavits, motions, objec tions, proposed finding s and conclusions, order s, and transcr ipts from hear ings and depositions. See T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 4). Any extensions of time must be reque sted by the trial cour

t and obtained f

rom this Court.

Filed: Aug ust 25, 2021 Do not publish
#### In the Matter of Esther Zachareas, Appellant, v Cesar A. Perales, as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, et al., Respondents.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, *inter alia,*to review a determination of the respondent Commissioner of the New York State Department of Social Services, dated January 11, 1988, which denied the petitioner’s application for medical assistance, the petitioner appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Facelle, J.), entered August 31, 1988, as, *inter alia,*dismissed so much of the petition as alleged that the State Social Services Law is violative of the Supremacy Clause of the Federal Constitution.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, and the order entered August 31, 1988, is vacated; and it is further,

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

Since questions of substantial evidence are involved, this *587proceeding should have been transferred to this court pursuant to CPLR 7804 (g). However, this court will treat the matter as one initially transferred here and will review the administrative determination de novo *(see, Matter of Old Country Toyota Corp. v Adduci,*136 AD2d 706; *People ex rel. McClatchie v Reid,*105 AD2d 721; CPLR 7804 [g]).

We note that Social Services Law § 366 (5) and its implementing regulations are in accord with Federal law *(see, e.g.,*42 USC §§ 1382b, 1396p) and are not violative of the Supremacy Clause *(see, Matter of Kircher v Perales,*112 AD2d 431). We further find that the determination is supported by substantial evidence. Under the circumstances, where the petitioner could offer only questionable proof that certain transfers of resources were made exclusively for some purpose other than to qualify for assistance, the denial of her application for medical assistance cannot be considered irrational and should be upheld *(see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176, 181-182; *Matter of Krakower v State of New York, Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal,*137 AD2d 688, 689). Mangano, J. P., Brown, Lawrence and Fiber, JJ., concur.
(104 So. 551)

#### Ex parte John HARTLEY.

(3 Div. 715.)

(Supreme Court of Alabama.

May 28, 1925.)

Certiorari to Court of Appeals.

Powell & Hamilton, of Greenville, for petitioner.

Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., opposed.

SOMERVILLE, J.

Petition of John Hartley for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in the case of John Hartley v. State, 20 Ala. App. 588, 104 So. 550.

Writ denied.

ANDERSON, C. X, and THOMAS and BOULDIN, JJ., concur.
# CE2010117EN.01023301.xml

| 6.5.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 117/233 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.5.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 117/233

---

Wednesday 25 March 2009Community guarantee to the European Investment Bank ***I

P6_TA(2009)0168

European Parliament legislative resolution of 25 March 2009 on the proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council granting a Community guarantee to the European Investment Bank against losses under loans and loan guarantees for projects outside the Community (COM(2008)0910 – C6-0025/2009 – 2008/0268(COD))

2010/C 117 E/43

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the Commission proposal to the European Parliament and the Council (COM(2008)0910),

having regard to Article 251 and Articles 179 and 181(a) of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C6-0025/2009),

having regard to Rule 51 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A6-0109/2009),

| 1. | Approves the Commission proposal as amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

| 2. | Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it intends to amend the proposal substantially or replace it with another text;

| 3. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

---

Wednesday 25 March 2009P6_TC1-COD(2008)0268

Position of the European Parliament adopted at first reading on 25 March 2009 with a view to the adoption of Decision No .../2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council granting a Community guarantee to the European Investment Bank against losses under loans and loan guarantees for projects outside the Community

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position at first reading corresponds to the final legislative act, Decision No 633/2009/EC.)

---
#                                                                         USNS COMFORT ARRIVES IN DOMINICAN REPUBLIC FOR CONTINUING PROMISE                                                                    

##### by Seaman Deven Fernandez

27 November 2022

                221127-N-DF135-1024 SANTO DOMINGO, Dominican Republic (Nov. 27, 2022) – The hospital ship USNS Comfort (T-AH 20) sits anchored in the harbor of Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic on Nov. 27, 2022. Comfort is deployed to U.S. 4th Fleet in support of Continuing Promise 2022, a humanitarian assistance and goodwill mission conducting direct medical care, expeditionary veterinary care, and subject matter expert exchanges with five partner nations in the Caribbean, Central and South America. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Deven Fernandez)            

                221127-N-DF135-1024            

SHARE IMAGE:

Download Image

Image Details

Photo By: Seaman Deven Fernandez

VIRIN: 221127-N-DF135-1024

Tags:
**Navy medicine**USNS Comfort**continuing promise**Dominican Republic**port visit
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2528

DILLARD’S, INCORPORATED, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus ARLENE JOHNSON, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (CA-03-2522) Submitted: July 29, 2005 Decided: August 25, 2005 Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Katherine Dudley Helms, William L. Duda, OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Allen D. Smith, Thomas K. Barlow, CHILDS & HALLIGAN, P.A., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Dillard’s Incorporated appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Johnson. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Dillard’s Inc. v. Johnson , No. CA-03-2522 (D.S.C. Nov. 5, 2004). 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.

AFFIRMED
#### BEREAU, Appellant, v. O’CONNELL, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.

February 12, 1894.)

Action by Henry Bereau against Daniel O’Connell.

No opinion. Reargument ordered. See 24 N. Y. Supp. 597. •
DISMISS and Opinion Filed August 27, 2021 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-00057-CV 

NOVO POINT, LLC, QUANTEC, LLC, RPV, LTD., AND 

JEFFREY BARON, Appellants 

V. 

ELISA KATZ, GARY SCHEPPS, DOMAIN VAULT, LLC, 

DOMAIN PROTECTION, LLC, NAME.COM, INC., SHAWN FRAZIN, 

AND SEA WASP, LLC, Appellees 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-01898-D 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Schenck, Reichek, and Carlyle 

Opinion by Justice Schenck 

Although directed to file their brief no later than August 13, 2021 and 

cautioned that failure to do so would result in dismissal of the appeal, appellants 

have failed to comply. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1). Accordingly, we dismiss the 

appeal. See id. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b),(c). 

210057F.P05 

 

/David J. Schenck/

DAVID J. SCHENCK 

JUSTICE 
 –2– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

NOVO POINT, LLC, QUANTEC, 

LLC, RPV, LTD., AND JEFFREY 

BARON, Appellants 

No. 05-21-00057-CV V. 

ELISA KATZ, GARY SCHEPPS, 

DOMAIN VAULT, LLC, DOMAIN 

PROTECTION, LLC, NAME.COM, 

INC., SHAWN FRAZIN, AND SEA 

WASP, LLC, Appellees 

 On Appeal from the County Court at 

Law No. 4, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-19-01898-

D. 

Opinion delivered by Justice 

Schenck, Justices Reichek and 

Carlyle participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. 

 We ORDER that appellees Elisa Katz, Gary Schepps, Domain Vault, LLC, 

Domain Protection, LLC, Name.com, Inc., Shawn Frazin, and Sea Wasp, LLC 

recover their costs, if any, of this appeal from appellants Novo Point, LLC, Quantec, 

LLC, RPV, LTD., and Jeffrey Baron. 

Judgment entered August 27, 2021.
<PAGE>

                                                                 EXHIBIT 99(ii)


                            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 on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending
December 31, 2002 of Graybar Electric Company, Inc. (the "Company") as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Juanita H. Hinshaw, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 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.

/s/ Juanita H. Hinshaw
Principal Financial Officer



March 27, 2003
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZClear

-  Adm. Daryl CaudleCommander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command 
-  Vice Adm. John GumbletonDeputy Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command 
-  Mr. Matthew H. SwartzCHIEF OF STAFF, U.S. Fleet Forces Command 
-  Lt. Cmdr. Joel DavidsonFleet Bandmaster, U.S. Fleet Forces Band 
-  Master Chief Musician Greg BonistalliSenior Enlisted Leader, U.S. Fleet Forces Band 
-  ENSIGN CHRISTOPHER B. MCGANNASSISTANT FLEET BANDMASTER, U.S. Fleet Forces Band 

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
<PAGE>


EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 Quarterly Report of i3 Mobile, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Edward Fletcher,
Senior Vice-President, Finance of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 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 result of operations of the
Company.


/s/ Edward Fletcher

Edward Fletcher
Senior Vice-President, Finance
August 14, 2002