alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS 

Appeals of --

Thorington Electrical and Construction 

Company 

Under Contract No. F A3300-05-C-OO 15 

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: 

) 

) 

) ASBCA Nos. 56987, 56988, 56989 

) 56990, 56991, 56992 

) 56993, 56994, 56995 

) 56996, 56998, 56999 

) 57000 

) 

) 

Deitra Crawley, Esq. 

Taylor English Duma LLP 

Atlanta, GA 

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Lt Col Matthew J. Mulbarger, USAF 

Air Force Chief Trial Attorney 

Sarah L. Stanton, Esq. 

Senior Trial Attorney 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

These appeals have been settled. By letter dated 19 August 2015, the parties 

filed a Joint Party Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice. 

The motion is granted. It is hereby ordered that ASBCA Nos. 56987, 56988, 

56989,56990,56991, 56992,56993,56994,56995,56996,56998,56999and57000 

are dismissed with prejudice. 

Dated: 26 August 2015 

I /I~\_· ~~-"' I \ 

' j 

\"~MA\i ----_..)~ 

Administrative Judge 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals 
I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the 

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA Nos. 56987, 56988, 56989, 

56990,56991,56992,56993,56994,56995,56996,56998,56999,57000,Appealsof 

Thorington Electrical and Construction Company, rendered in conformance with the 

Board's Charter. 

Dated: 

2 

JEFFREY D. GARDIN 

Recorder, Armed Services 

Board of Contract Appeals
STATE v. HANKINS

No. COA04-1079.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed November 15, 2005.

Certification Date December 5, 2005

Appeal from the Brunswick (02CRS57572, 02CRS57573, 02CRS57574, 02CRS57575, 02CRS57580, 02CRS57576, 02CRS57586, 02CRS57587, 02CRS57594, 02CRS57595, 03CRS630, 03CRS4606, 03CRS3616, 03CRS3617).

Case Reported Without Published Opinion. New trial.
40 Office of Economic Adjustment - Defense Spending by State, FY 2016

 Data sources: DoD’s Defense Manpower Data Center; DoD’s Procurement and Acquisition Policy; DoD’s Military Installations, Ranges and Training Areas; USASpending.gov; U.S. Bureau of Economic 

Analysis; U.S. Census Bureau; and Unitedstateszipcodes.org.

IDAHO

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

DEFENSE PERSONNEL

FISCAL YEAR 2016

Allocations, By Type

Allocations, By Service

$295.8 MILLION

TOTAL PAYROLL

10,582

TOTAL PERSONNEL

Top Defense Personnel Locations

County Total* Active Duty Civilians

Military

Elmore 4,696 3,968 538

Ada 3,830 96 1,126

Kootenai 309 ND 69

Bannock 246 ND 13

Canyon 238 ND ND

Twin Falls 191 ND ND

Latah 132 33 10

Bonneville 130 41 10

Nez Perce 122 ND 10

Clearwater 92 12 60

*Total also includes uniformed National Guard and Reserve units.

National Guard/

Reserve: 43%

Active Duty: 39%

Civilian: 18%

46%

3%

51%

0%

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

By Type

Service: 45%

Construction: 3%

Research and 

Development: 0%

Supplies and 

Equipment: 52%

By Service

Top Defense Contractors (M=millions)

Brad Hall & Associates $85.9 M

Bering Sea Environmental $12.2 M

PKL Services $10.5 M

Johnson Controls $7.1 M

General Dynamics $5.9 M

KRSW, JV $5.1 M

National Native American Construction $4.3 M

AMEC Earth & Environmental $4.0 M

Milpower $3.6 M

MLDC Government Services $3.5 M

$0.2 $0.2 $0.2 $0.2 $0.2

$0.3

$0.2 $0.2

21%

5%

26%

48%

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

Contract Awards Performed (By Fiscal Year, Billions)

09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Office of Economic Adjustment - Defense Spending by State, FY 2016 41

Kootenai 

Elmore

Bonneville

Latah Clearwater 

Canyon 

Ada 

Bonner 

Bannock

Kootenai 

Elmore

Bonneville

Bingham

Latah Clearwater 

Canyon 

Ada 

Elmore County

$185.5 M

Ada County

$81.7 M

Kootenai County 

$7.0 M

Clearwater County

$4.2 M

Bonner County

$2.7 M

Bonneville County

$2.5 M

Latah County

$2.2 M

Canyon County

$1.9 M

Bannock County

$1.8 M

Nez Perce County

$1.7 M

(M=millions)

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS (M=millions) (M=millions)

Bonneville County

$94.1 M

Elmore County

$63.4 M

Ada County

$16.4 M

Kootenai County

$11.1 M

Bingham County

$10.7 M

Clearwater County

$7.5 M

Latah County

$4.1 M

Shoshone County

$4.0 M

Canyon County

$3.9 M

Owyhee County

$2.4 M

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS (M=millions)

#46

$0.5 B 

SPENT IN STATE

#45

0.8% OF STATE GDP

0.1%

OF TOTAL U.S. 

DEFENSE SPENDING

$308

PER RESIDENT

#46

$0.2 B CONTRACT 

SPENDING

#44

10,582 NUMBER 

OF PERSONNEL

#44

$0.3 B PERSONNEL 

SPENDING

FISCAL YEAR 2016 IDAHO

Nez Perce 

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active

Shoshone

Owyhee
BOBBY D. BIGGS,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-3624

Opinion filed September 4, 2014.

Petition Alleging Ineffective Assistance of Appellate Counsel -- Original 

Jurisdiction.

Bobby D. Biggs, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is denied on the 

merits.

PADOVANO, THOMAS, and ROBERTS, JJ., CONCUR.
exv10w08



 






EXHIBIT 10.08




AMENDMENT TO

NON-QUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENTS




     THIS AMENDMENT, made and entered into on May 23, 2005, by ALLIED WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC.
(“Company”) and WARREN B. RUDMAN (“Optionee”).



R E C I T A L S:




     1. Optionee has been previously granted options to purchase an aggregate of 95,000 shares of
the Company’s common stock (“Options”), under the terms of the Allied Waste Industries, Inc. 1994
Amended and Restated Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan (“Plan”);



     2. Optionee is fully vested in the Options, and none of the Options have been exercised;



     3. The Company has agreed to extend the exercise periods for certain of the Options; and



     4. The Company deems it appropriate to amend the Optionee’s Non-Qualified Stock Option
Agreements (“Agreements”), to extend the relevant exercise periods.



     THEREFORE, the Company and Optionee hereby adopt this Amendment as follows:



     1. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Agreements, the exercise periods for the
Options listed on Schedule A, attached to this Amendment, are extended to the earlier of: (a) three
years from the date Optionee’s last date of service on the Company’s Board of Directors, i.e., May
20, 2008, or (b) ten years from the Options’ Dates of Grant.



     2. The Effective Date of this Amendment shall be May 23, 2005.



     3. Except as amended, all of the terms and conditions of the Agreements shall remain in full
force and effect.



 









 





	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	ALLIED WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC.
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	Title	 
	 

	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	Warren B. Rudman






 









 






SCHEDULE A




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	Original
	Date of	 	Number of	 	Expiration
	Grant	 	Options	 	Date
	05/21/04
	 	10,000	 	05/21/14
	05/21/03
	 	10,000	 	05/21/13
	05/29/02
	 	10,000	 	05/29/12
	05/23/01
	 	10,000	 	05/23/11
	05/03/00
	 	10,000	 	05/03/10
	06/29/99
	 	10,000	 	06/29/09
	05/28/98
	 	10,000	 	05/28/08
	07/02/97
	 	25,000	 	07/02/07
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5550 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to increase the maximum age to 

qualify for coverage as a ‘‘child’’ under the health benefits program 

for Federal employees. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 6, 2008 

Mr. DAVIS of Illinois (for himself, Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia, Mrs. MALONEY

of New York, Mr. CUMMINGS, Ms. NORTON, and Mr. SARBANES) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to increase the maximum age to qualify for coverage as a ‘‘child’’ under 

the health benefits program for Federal employees. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. INCREASE IN MAXIMUM AGE TO QUALIFY FOR 

4 COVERAGE AS A ‘‘CHILD’’. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 8901(5) of title 5, United 

6 States Code, is amended— 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5550 IH

1 (1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), 

2 by striking ‘‘22 years of age’’ and inserting ‘‘25 

3 years of age’’; and 

4 (2) in the matter following subparagraph (B), 

5 by striking ‘‘age 22’’ and inserting ‘‘age 25’’. 

6 (b) SELF AND FAMILY COVERAGE FOR A FORMER

7 SPOUSE.—Section 8905(c)(2)(B) of title 5, United States 

8 Code, is amended— 

9 (1) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘22 years of age’’ 

10 and inserting ‘‘25 years of age’’; and 

11 (2) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘age 22’’ and in12 serting ‘‘age 25’’. 

13 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—This Act and the amend14 ments made by this Act— 

15 (1) shall take effect on the first day of the first 

16 contract year beginning at least 180 days after the 

17 date of the enactment of this Act; and 

18 (2) shall apply with respect to health care serv19 ices or supplies provided on or after the date on 

20 which this Act takes effect. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER (1)

Pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  Section  1350,  as  created  by  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002,  the  following  certification  is  being  made to
accompany  Catskill  Litigation  Trust's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
period ended March 31, 2005;

In connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Catskill  Litigation  Trust on Form
10-QSB for the period  ended  March 31,  2005 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul A. deBary, Acting
Chief Financial Officer of the Catskill Litigation Trust,  certify,  pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 that to my knowledge:

            (1)   The Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section
                  13(a) or  Section  15(d),  as  applicable,  of the  Securities
                  Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

            (2)   The information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in
                  all material respects,  the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Catskill Litigation Trust.

                                           /s/ Paul A. deBary
                                           ----------------------------------
                                           Name:  Paul A. deBary
                                           Title: Acting Chief Financial Officer
                                           Date:  May 13, 2005

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

The foregoing  certification  is being  furnished  solely  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section  1350 and is not  being  filed as part of the  Report  or as a  separate
disclosure document.
```
# 6ii01SO

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT

HELENA,MONTANA 59620-3003 Supreme Court No. DA 20-0019 KRISTINE DAVENPORT,

Plaintiff and Appellant, v. COUNTY OF LINCOLN,a political subdivision of the State of Montana; SHERIFF OF COUNTY OF LINCOLN, State of Montana, and ROBY BOWE,

Defendants and Appellees. 

# FILED MAR 0 6 2020 Bowen Greenw000 Clerk of Suprerne Coun State of IVIontana GRANT OF EXTENSION

Pursuant to authority granted under M.R. App.P. 26(1), Appellant is given an extension of time until April 13, 2020, to prepare, file, and serve the opening brief. DATED this March 6, 2020
owen eenwood Clerk ofthe Supreme Court

c: Kristine Davenport, Gregory L. Bonilla

PO BOX 203003 •HELENA MT •59620-3003 • TELEPHONE:(406)444-3858 •FAX:(406)444-5705 03/06/2020
Case Number: DA 20-0019
William Carl ROYSTER v. N.C. COURT OF APPEALS.

No. 203P06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 26, 2006.

William C. Royster, Pro Se.

William P. Hart, Senior Deputy Attorney General, for N.C. Court of Appeals.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Plaintiff on the 17th day of April 2006 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Guilford County:

"Denied by order of the Court in Conference this the 26th day of April 2006."
STATE of North Carolina v. Monica D. BRANCH.

No. 95P04-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 29, 2006.

William P. Hart, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Belinda J. Foster, District Attorney, for State of NC.

Barbara S. Blackman, Assistant Appellate Defender, for Monica D. Branch.

Prior report: ___ N.C.App. ___, 627 S.E.2d 506.

*221*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 25th day of April 2006 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 29th day of June 2006."
Exhibit 4(C)



 




EXHIBIT 4(c)




Form of Designation of Beneficiary




STATE AUTO FINANCIAL CORPORATION

OUTSIDE DIRECTORS RESTRICTED SHARE UNIT PLAN




Designation of Beneficiary






	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Participant's Name:	 	 	 	SSN:	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 




Pursuant to the provisions of the State Auto Financial Corporation Outside Directors Restricted
Share Unit Plan (the “Plan”) permitting designation of a beneficiary or beneficiaries by a
participant, I hereby designate the following person or persons (which may be an entity(ies) or a
trust) as primary and secondary beneficiaries of any benefits under the Plan payable by reason of
my death:







Primary Beneficiary:





	 	 	 
	Name:	 	 
	 	 	 
	 
	 	 





	 	 	 
	Relationship:	 	 
	 	 	 
	 
	 	 





	 	 	 
	Address:	 	 
	 	 	 
	 
	 	 




 



 




	 	 	 
	Social Security Number, if known:	 	 
	 	 	 
	 
	 	 












Secondary Beneficiary:





	 	 	 
	Name:	 	 
	 	 	 
	 
	 	 





	 	 	 
	Relationship:	 	 
	 	 	 
	 
	 	 





	 	 	 
	Address:	 	 
	 	 	 
	 
	 	 




 



 




	 	 	 
	Social Security Number, if known:	 	 
	 	 	 
	 
	 	 









I RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REVOKE OR CHANGE ANY BENEFICIARY DESIGNATION. I HEREBY REVOKE ALL PRIOR
DESIGNATIONS (IF ANY) OF BENEFICIARIES AND SECONDARY BENEFICIARIES.



The Company shall pay all sums payable under the Plan by reason of my death to the primary
beneficiary, if he or she survives me, and if no primary beneficiary survives me, then to the
secondary beneficiary. If no named beneficiary survives me, then the Company shall pay all amounts
in accordance with the terms of the Plan. NOTE: Unless you provide otherwise in completing this
designation, the Company shall pay all sums payable to more than one beneficiary equally to the
living beneficiaries.





 



Date of this Designation






 



Signature of Participant
STATE v. BULLOCK.

No. COA05-743.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed June 20, 2006.

Certification Date July 10, 2006.

Appeal from Wake (02CRS2837).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
STATE v. Robin Medford JONES.

No. 435P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 15, 2005.

Reita P. Pendry, for Jones.

Ronald L. Moore, District Attorney, for State.

*AMENDED ORDER*

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 15th day of August 2005 by Attorney General for Temporary Stay:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference this the 15th day of August 2005."
BATTS EX REL. KING v. BATTS.

No. COA04-1044.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed March 7, 2006.

Certification Date March 27, 2006.

Appeal from Wilson (01CVS1375)

Case without published opinion. Affirmed.
EXHIBIT 99.4

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

I, David L. Sokol,  Chief  Executive  Officer of MidAmerican  Funding,  LLC (the
"Company"),  certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:

     (1) the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the  Company  for the  quarterly
     period  ended  March  31,  2003  (the  "Report")  fully  complies  with the
     requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange Act of
     1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

     (2)  the  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
     material respects,  the financial condition and result of operations of the
     Company.


Dated:   May 12, 2003




                               /s/ David L. Sokol
                               -----------------------
                               David L. Sokol
                               Chief Executive Officer


A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  MidAmerican  Funding,  LLC and  will be  retained  by  MidAmerican
Funding,  LLC and  furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its
staff upon request.
Exhibit
32.2





TELETOUCH
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.





OFFICER’S
CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT
TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18
U.S.C. 1350)





In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of TELETOUCH COMMUNICATIONS,
INC. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended November 30, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned, Douglas E. Sloan, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of his
knowledge:





1.
              The
      Report is in full compliance 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 operation of the
Company.





/s/ Douglas E.
      SloanDouglas
      E. SloanChief
      Financial OfficerJanuary
      14, 2010
STATE v. Eric Marshall HAMMETT.

No. 83A06.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

April 5, 2006.

Kelly L. Sandling, Assistant Attorney General, Roxann Vaneekhoven, District Attorney, for State of NC.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 3rd day of April 2006 by Defendant for Extension of Time to File Brief:

"Motion Allowed. Defendant (Eric Marshall Hammett) shall have up to and including the 16th day of May 2006 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court. By order of the Court in conference this the 5th day of April 2006."
#### Lawrence G. Biggio, Appellant, v Jacqueline Biggio, Respondent.

[801 NYS2d 339]

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Iannacci, J.), dated November 19, 2004, as granted that branch of the defendant wife’s motion which was for leave to reargue that branch of his prior motion which was to preclude her from offering any financial evidence at trial, and deeming all financial issues resolved against her, which had been granted by order of the same court dated August 19, 2004, and upon reargument, vacated the prior determination.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted leave to reargue that branch of the plaintiffs prior motion which was for preclusion, and upon reargument, properly vacated its earlier determination granting that branch of the motion. The preclusion order overlooked the plaintiffs failure to make full disclosure, including disclosure of financial information regarding assets and expenses clearly within his sole control. Under the circumstances, the plaintiff was in no position to argue that the court should sanction the defendant with the penalty of preclusion *(see Richter v Richter,*131 AD2d 453, 454-455 [1987]).

The plaintiffs remaining contentions are either without merit or need not be reached in light of the foregoing determination. H. Miller, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Skelos, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 10.2(b)


                   Schedule of Warrant (refinancing) Issued by
               NCT Group, Inc. to Carole Salkind on August 1, 2005


                         Expiration           Exercise           Shares
       Grant Date            Date               Price            Granted
       ----------        -----------        -----------        -----------
        08/01/05           08/01/10           $ 0.0101         220,000,000
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5612 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5612

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to waive the deadline on the 
     construction of GO Zone property which is eligible for bonus 
                             depreciation.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 13, 2008

 Mr. Taylor (for himself, Mr. Melancon, Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Thompson of 
 Mississippi, and Mr. Pickering) introduced the following bill; which 
            was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to waive the deadline on the 
     construction of GO Zone property which is eligible for bonus 
                             depreciation.

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

SECTION 1. WAIVER OF DEADLINE ON CONSTRUCTION OF GO ZONE PROPERTY 
              ELIGIBLE FOR BONUS DEPRECIATION.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 1400N(d)(3) is amended 
to read as follows:
                    ``(B) without regard to `and before January 1, 
                2009' in clause (i) thereof,''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to property placed in service after December 31, 2007.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.2**

**TELANETIX, INC.**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. §1350,            AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO            SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Telanetix, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, J. Paul Quinn, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,            as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
| (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section13(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. |
|              |   |                         |
|-------------------|--------|------------------------------|
| Date:May 15, 2008 |   | /s/ J. Paul Quinn            |
|              |   | J. Paul Quinn                |
|              |   | Chief Financial Officer |