alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 12.3

CERTIFICATION

I, Wilfried Vancraen,
certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F/A of MATERIALISE NV
(the company);
|-- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|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 under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; and
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|3. | Based on my knowledge, the financial 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.
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 30, 2020



|    |  |                        
|--- |  | -----------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Wilfried Vancraen  
|    |  | Wilfried Vancraen      
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leonel FLORES-HUERTA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-41328.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided June 20, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Timothy William Crooks, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Leonel Flores-Huerta (Flores) appeals following his guilty plea to a charge of *380illegally reentering the United States after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Flores argues, for the first time on appeal, that the district court misapplied the Sentencing Guidelines by characterizing his state felony conviction for possession of cocaine as an “aggravated felony” for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(l)(C). Flores’s argument is unavailing in light of circuit precedent. *See United States v. Hinojosa-Lopez,*130 F.3d 691, 693-94 (5th Cir.1997). Flores argues that this circuit’s precedent is inconsistent with *Jerome v. United States,*318 U.S. 101, 63 S.Ct. 483, 87 L.Ed. 640 (1943). Having preceded *Hinojosa-Lopez, Jerome*is not “an intervening Supreme Court case explicitly or implicitly overruling that prior precedent.” *See United States v. Short,*181 F.3d 620, 624 (5th Cir.1999).

Flores also challenges for the first time on appeal the constitutionality of § 1326(b) in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Flores’s constitutional challenge is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Flores contends that *Almendarez-Torres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi,*we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *Almendarez-Torres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Flores properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

CHERYLE WILLIAMS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO.

) 05-0234-BH-L

OCWEN FEDERAL BANK, FSB, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

This action is now before the Court on plaintiff motion (Doc. 9) to reconsider the

Order entered on May 12, 2005 (Doc. 8) denying plaintiff’s motion to remand and granting

the motion to stay filed by defendant Ocwen Ocwen Federal Bank, FSB (“Ocwen”). In the

alternative, plaintiff seeks permission to appeal this order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). 

The Court has considered plaintiff’s present arguments and considered yet again

plaintiff’s arguments in support of remand, together with all other pertinent portions of the

record. The Court concludes that its decision regarding the appropriateness of re-removal

in this case and the existence of diversity jurisdiction is correct. The Court further

concludes that an appeal of that decision at this stage of the litigation is inappropriate. The

Court cannot certify that its order denying remand “involves a controlling question of law

as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate

appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.” 

28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). It is therefore ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to reconsider be

Case 2:05-cv-00234-BH-D Document 10 Filed 05/25/05 Page 1 of 2
2

and is hereby DENIED in all respects and the Order entered on May 12, 2005 (Doc. 8) be

and is hereby AFFIRMED.

DONE this 25th day of May, 2005.

 s/ W. B. Hand 

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-00234-BH-D Document 10 Filed 05/25/05 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2191 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2191

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Environmental 
   Protection Agency, Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System for 
                           fiscal year 2024.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 29, 2023

Mr. Biggs (for himself, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Gaetz, Mr. Good of Virginia, 
   Mr. Roy, and Mr. Crane) introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Environmental 
   Protection Agency, Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System for 
                           fiscal year 2024.

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

SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL 
              PROTECTION AGENCY, HAZARDOUS WASTE ELECTRONIC MANIFEST 
              SYSTEM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, amounts authorized 
to be appropriated or otherwise available for Environmental Protection 
Agency, Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System for fiscal year 2024 
may not exceed $0.
                                 <all>
```
IN	THE	UNITED	STATES	DISTRICT	COURT	FOR	THE

SOUTHERN	DISTRICT	OF	ALABAMA

SOUTHERN	DIVISION

KELVIN	PATTERSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

MOBILE	COUNTY	

COMMISSION,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIVIL	ACTION	NO.

16-00019-CB-C

ORDER

This	action	was	filed	more	than	90	days	ago,	and	there	is	no	evidence	that	the	

defendant	has	been	served.		Rule	4(m)	of	the	Federal	Rules	of	Civil	Procedure	states,	

in	relevant	part:		

If	a	defendant	is	not	served	within	90	days	after	the	complaint	is	filed	

the	court—on	motion	or	on	its	own	after	notice	to	the	plaintiff--must	

dismiss	the	action	without	prejudice	against	that	defendant	or	order	

that	service	be	made	within	a	specified	time.

Therefore,	Plaintiff	must	file	proof	of	service	of	process	on	or	before	May	11,	2016.		

Failure	to	do	so	will	result	in	the	dismissal	of	this	action.

DONE and	ORDERED this	the	18th day	of	April,	2016.

s/Charles	R.	Butler,	Jr.

Senior	United	States	District	Judge

Case 1:16-cv-00019-CG-C Document 9 Filed 04/18/16 Page 1 of 1
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2236 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for US Department 

of Agriculture, Executive Operations, Office of the Chief Information 

Officer for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for US 

Department of Agriculture, Executive Operations, Office 

of the Chief Information Officer for fiscal year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, EXECU5 TIVE OPERATIONS, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF IN6 FORMATION OFFICER FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for US Department of Agriculture, Executive OperVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:55 Apr 19, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2236.IH H2236

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2236 IH

1 ations, Office of the Chief Information Officer for fiscal 

2 year 2024 may not exceed $55,630,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

MICHAEL CHAPPELL and )

DARLENE CHAPPELL, )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO.

) 05-00347-BH-M

WAL-MART STORES, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

JUDGMENT

Pursuant to the Order entered this day granting defendant’s motion for summary

judgment, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that JUDGMENT be and is

hereby entered in favor of the defendant, Wal-Mart Stores East, LP , and against the

plaintiffs, Michael Chappell and Darlene Chappell, the plaintiffs to have and recover

nothing of the defendant. Costs are taxed against the plaintiffs.

DONE this 14th day of March, 2006.

 s/ W. B. Hand 

SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-00347-BH-M Document 20 Filed 03/14/06 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

VALENTINE VENTURES, LLC, et al., )

 )

Plaintiffs, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION 14-0352-WS-M

 )

GULF COAST MINERAL, LLC, et al., )

 )

Defendants. )

 ORDER 

The four plaintiffs have filed a motion to dismiss two of their number as 

plaintiffs. (Doc. 65). The defendants filed a response, (Doc. 71), and the plaintiffs 

declined the opportunity to file a reply. (Doc. 67).

No party questions the Court’s authority to grant the requested relief under 

Rule 41(a)(2).1 The defendants, however, ask the Court to impose “terms” under 

that rule. 

The defendants first ask the Court to delay ruling on the plaintiffs’ motion 

until April 21, 2015, to give them “an opportunity to file a motion for sanctions 

supported by deposition testimony taken just last week.” (Doc. 71 at 1, 6). The 

defendants have been given this time, and more, and they have filed no such 

motion. 

Second, the defendants ask the Court to declare the dismissal to be an

adjudication on the merits. (Doc. 71 at 1-3, 6). Their theory is that the Court’s 

 1 Rule 41(a) allows dismissal of “an action.” Thus, a plaintiff may dismiss one of 

multiple defendants under this rule, because “dismissal in that context completely 

removes a party from the case,” Exxon Corp. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 599 F.2d 659, 

662 (5th Cir. 1979), ending the “action” as to that defendant. Accord Klay v. United 

Healthgroup, Inc., 376 F.3d 1092, 1106 (11th Cir. 2004). In the same way, dismissal of 

less than all plaintiffs ends the action as to those plaintiffs. 

Case 1:14-cv-00352-WS-N Document 88 Filed 05/28/15 Page 1 of 2
2

order dismissing the first amended complaint constituted an adjudication on the 

merits and that the plaintiffs “should not be permitted to file [a second] amended 

complaint and then immediately dismiss it in order to unring the bell of an 

adjudication on the merits.” (Id. at 2-3). But the defendants have cited no 

authority standing for the proposition that the dismissal of a complaint for 

pleading deficiencies, with leave to amend, constitutes an adjudication on the 

merits. Since the plaintiffs did timely amend, it is difficult to see how the Court’s 

order could have adjudicated the merits and thus ended the litigation.

For the reasons set forth above, the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss is granted. 

Plaintiffs Bruce Wallis and Harvey Kelley are dismissed without prejudice. 

DONE and ORDERED this 28th day of May, 2015.

s/ WILLIAM H. STEELE

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-00352-WS-N Document 88 Filed 05/28/15 Page 2 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

MARY ANNE HILL, :

o/b/o ERNEST J. HILL, IV, :

 :

Plaintiff, :

 :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 08-0590-CB-M

 :

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, :

Commissioner of :

Social Security, :

 :

Defendant. :

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of all pleadings in this

file, and there having been no objections filed, the Report and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(B) is adopted as the opinion of this Court.

It is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s attorney’s Application for

Attorney Fees Under the Equal Access to Justice Act be GRANTED,

without objection, and that Plaintiff’s attorney, William T.

Coplin, Jr., be AWARDED an EAJA attorney's fee in the amount of

$1,456.83.

DONE this 12th day of January, 2010.

s/Charles R. Butler, Jr. 

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:08-cv-00590-CB-M Document 28 Filed 01/12/10 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                           5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER>                        1,000

       

<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                        MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                              90,903
<SECURITIES>                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                       178,571
<ALLOWANCES>                        4,402
<INVENTORY>                         176,874
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    450,846
<PP&E>                              354,425
<DEPRECIATION>                      216,066
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      688,051
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               122,503
<BONDS>                             40,273
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               0
<PREFERRED>                         0
<COMMON>                            1,027
<OTHER-SE>                          510,107
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        688,051
<SALES>                             427,942
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    427,942
<CGS>                               257,727
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       257,727
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    91,484
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    284
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  2,783
<INCOME-PRETAX>                     80,072
<INCOME-TAX>                        28,025
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                 52,047
<DISCONTINUED>                      2,195
<EXTRAORDINARY>                     0
<CHANGES>                           0
<NET-INCOME>                        49,852
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       0.55
<EPS-DILUTED>                       0.55
<FN>
This financial data schedule has been restated in accordance with SFAS No. 128
(Earnings Per Share), and also to reflect the disposal of the company's network
products business.
</FN>


        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 6 (Friday, January 9, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1429-1430]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30350]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-5828-N-02]


Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the Homeless

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and 
Development, HUD.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and 
surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible 
use to assist the homeless.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juanita Perry, Department of Housing 
and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street SW., Room 7262, Washington, 
DC 20410; telephone (202) 402-3970; TTY number for the hearing- and 
speech-impaired (202) 708-2565, (these telephone numbers are not toll-
free), or

[[Page 1430]]

call the toll-free Title V information line at 800-927-7588.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the December 12, 1988 
court order in National Coalition for the Homeless v. Veterans 
Administration, No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.), HUD publishes a Notice, on a 
weekly basis, identifying unutilized, underutilized, excess and surplus 
Federal buildings and real property that HUD has reviewed for 
suitability for use to assist the homeless. Today's Notice is for the 
purpose of announcing that no additional properties have been 
determined suitable or unsuitable this week.

    Dated: December 22, 2014.
Brian P. Fitzmaurice,
Director, Division of Community Assistance, Office of Special Needs 
Assistance Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014-30350 Filed 1-8-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF CUMBERLAND BANCORP, INC. FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          18,255
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           5,396
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                11,250
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     16,213
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           6,677
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             6,594
<LOANS>                                        440,316
<ALLOWANCE>                                      5,146
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 525,559
<DEPOSITS>                                     435,252
<SHORT-TERM>                                    31,122
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              5,748
<LONG-TERM>                                     18,162
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,429
<OTHER-SE>                                      28,846
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 525,559
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 36,528
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,502
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 1,163
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                39,193
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              17,050
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              19,127
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           20,066
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    1,623
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 17,198
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,624
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       3,511
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,511
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.56
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.55
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.71
<LOANS-NON>                                      2,446
<LOANS-PAST>                                       241
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   693
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  4,300
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 4,012
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      758
<RECOVERIES>                                       117
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                5,146
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             4,477
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            669


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 10.10

                          TAI CHIUN DEVELOPING CO. LTD.
        af, No. 6, Lane 151, Sec. 2 Ziou Tzung Road, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
                  Tel: (880-8) 2087-5058 Fax: (880-2) 2027-5086
                         E-mail: taichiun@ma15.ninet.net


Att:      Mr. Patrick Rocillo
Fm:       Mr. Charles Hung
Cc:       Ms. Margaret Yee/Mr. Mark Hein
Subject:  Buying Agent Letter

                                                                  March 28, 2000

Dear Patrick,

We are pleased to learn that RocTech USA, Inc./RocTech HK Ltd. is the sole
buying agent for Bentley Communications Corp. (U.S.A) which is having
significant performance during this 1999-2000 year. This will be considered an
authorization letter to purchase merchandise form our company for your USA and
international markets. This will be an open agreement in which terms and price
will be mutual approved for the benefit of both parties involved.

If for whatever reason in the future Tai Chiun Developing Co. Ltd. decides to
authorize exclusive rights of any of its products to another company, entity,
and or Trust, RocTech USA, Inc./RocTech HK Ltd. will still have and retain the
authorization to purchase any product at the same price for any and all
preexisting contracts currently existing.

With our quality products, dedicated services, we would like to grow with you in
successful partnership.

Best regards,
For and on behalf of
TAI CHIUM DEVELOPING CO. LTD.

Mr. Charles Hung
Managing Director
/s/ Charles Hung
---------------------------------



                                                                              48