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



(FAIRMONT HOTELS AND RESORTS LOGO)

EXHIBIT NO. 99.1

For immediate release

FAIRMONT HOTELS & RESORTS INC.
TO RELEASE THIRD QUARTER EARNINGS

TORONTO, September 30, 2003 Fairmont Hotels & Resorts Inc. (FHR) (TSX/NYSE:
FHR) will release its third quarter earnings on October 21, 2003 to be followed
by a conference call that day at 1:30 p.m. Eastern Time. Participating on the
call will be FHRs chief executive officer, William R. Fatt, along with Chris
J. Cahill, president and chief operating officer, and M. Jerry Patava,
executive vice president and chief financial officer.

Investors are invited to access the call by dialing 416-695-5806 or
1-800-273-9672. You will be required to identify yourself and the organization
on whose behalf you are participating. A recording of this call will be made
available beginning at 4:30 p.m. on October 21,2003 through to October 28,
2003. To access the recording please dial 416-695-5800 or 1-800-408-3053 and
use the reservation number 1481058.

A live audio webcast of this conference call will be available via FHRs
investor website (www.fairmont.com/investor). An archived recording of the webcast will remain
available on the website until the next quarterly earnings conference call.

About Fairmont Hotels & Resorts Inc.

FHR is one of North Americas leading owner/operators of luxury hotels and
resorts. FHRs managed portfolio consists of 81 luxury and first-class
properties with more than 32,000 guestrooms in Canada, the United States,
Mexico, Bermuda, Barbados and the United Arab Emirates. It holds an 83.5%
controlling interest in Fairmont Hotels & Resorts (Fairmont), North Americas
largest luxury hotel management company. Fairmont manages 42 distinctive city
center and resort hotels such as The Fairmont San Francisco, The Fairmont Banff
Springs, Fairmont Le Château Frontenac and The Fairmont Scottsdale Princess.
FHR also holds a 100% interest in Delta Hotels, Canadas largest first-class
hotel management company, which manages and franchises a portfolio of 38 city
center and resort properties in Canada. In addition to hotel management, FHR
holds real estate interests in 24 properties, two large undeveloped land blocks
and an approximate 35% investment interest in Legacy Hotels Real Estate
Investment Trust, which owns 24 properties.

-30-

|         |  |                                      
|-------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Contact: |  | Emma Thompson                        
|         |  | Executive Director Investor Relations
|         |  | Tel: 866-627-0642                    
|         |  | Email: investor@fairmont.com         
|         |  | Website: www.fairmont.com
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-2054

JAMES PETER RAIBLE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JOHN CAMPBELL, Major,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Terrence W. Boyle, District

Judge. (CA-94-35-4-BO)

Submitted: May 1, 1997 Decided: May 7, 1997

Before WIDENER and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

James Peter Raible, Appellant Pro Se. Charles E. Simpson, Jr.,

HARRIS, SHIELDS & CREECH, New Bern, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his

action with prejudice for failure to comply with discovery orders.

We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning

of the district court. Raible v. Campbell, No. CA-94-35-4-BO

(E.D.N.C. June 26, 1996). 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THIRD
QUARTER 1996 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           1,766
<SECURITIES>                                    16,847
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,421
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,671
<INVENTORY>                                      7,248
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                47,995
<PP&E>                                          13,135
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,488
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  58,459
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,161
<BONDS>                                            607
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        16,920
<OTHER-SE>                                      35,771
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    58,459
<SALES>                                         46,364
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                51,587
<CGS>                                           12,529
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,501
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                28,031
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,637
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  63
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,061
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,259
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,802
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,802
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .78
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .78
        

</TABLE>
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1167 

CA 13-00342 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, AND VALENTINO, JJ. 

 

ERICA DANIELS, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

FRANCES A. RUMSEY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, 

ET AL., DEFENDANT. 

(APPEAL NO. 1.)

 

BOUVIER PARTNERSHIP, LLP, BUFFALO (NORMAN E.S. GREENE OF COUNSEL), FOR

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

THE HIGGINS KANE LAW GROUP, P.C., BUFFALO (TERRENCE P. HIGGINS OF

COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Gerald J.

Whalen, J.), entered May 15, 2012. The order, inter alia, denied that

part of the motion of defendant Frances A. Rumsey to compel a physical 

examination of plaintiff by an orthopedic specialist. 

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed

without costs.

Same Memorandum as in Daniels v Rumsey ([appeal No. 2] ___ AD3d

___ [Nov. 15, 2013]). 

Entered: November 15, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

Materialise NV 

Leuven, Belgium 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-197236 and No. 333-212445) and Form F-3 (No. 333-213649) of Materialise NV of ourreport dated April 28, 2017, relating to the consolidated financial statements which appears in this Annual Report on Form 20-F. Our report contains an explanatory paragraph relating to the Company’srestatement of its consolidated financial statements as described in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements. 

BDO Bedrijfsrevisoren Burg. CVBA

On behalf of it, 

Bert Kegels 

/s/ Bert Kegels 

Zaventem, Belgium 

April 28, 2017
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

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

 

In condition with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Polydex Pharmaceuticals Limited (the “Company”) for the fiscal quarter ended October 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, George G. Usher, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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.

 

 
| By                       | /s/ George  G. Usher |   |
|--------------------------|----------------------|--------|
| George G.  Usher,        |
| Chief  Executive Officer |
| December 15,  2004       |

 

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.

 

1

----
EXHIBIT
32.1





STATMON
TECHNOLOGIES CORP.





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


19
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 Statmon Technologies Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended September 30, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Geoffrey Talbot, Chief Executive 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 to the best of my knowledge:




(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/ Geoffrey P. TalbotGeoffrey
      P. TalbotChief
      Executive OfficerAugust
      27, 2009




A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
by Section 906, has been provided to Statmon Technologies Corp. and will be
retained by Statmon Technologies Corp. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2049 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of Treasury, Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, Salaries and Expenses 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 Financial Services 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Department of Treasury, Office of Terrorism and Financial 

Intelligence, Salaries and Expenses 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 DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, OFFICE OF TER5 RORISM AND FINANCIAL INTELLIGENCE, SAL6 ARIES AND EXPENSES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

7 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

8 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail9 able for Department of Treasury, Office of Terrorism and 


sspencer on DSK126QN23PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2049 IH

1 Financial Intelligence, Salaries and Expenses for fiscal 

2 year 2024 may not exceed $159,000,00. 

Æ 


sspencer on DSK126QN23PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1941

VICTORIA A. JEDROWICZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GIANT FOOD INC., Defendant - Appellee, andFRANK PODGORSKI, Store Manager, in his official capacity; KEVIN LONG, Assistant Store Manager, in his official capacity, Defendants.

No. 01-1133

VICTORIA A. JEDROWICZ, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus GIANT FOOD INCORPORATED, Defendant - Appellee,2 and ROYAL AHOLD; J. SAINSBURY (USA) HOLDINGS, INCORPORATED; PETER MANOS, in his official capacity; BRIAN KAMISCINSKI, District Manager in his official capacity; FRANK PODGORSKI, Store Manager in his official capacity, Defendants. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. William M. Nickerson, District Judge. (CA-96-3562-WMN, CA-98-3899-WMN) Submitted: June 22, 2001 Decided: July 9, 2001 Before WIDENER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jo Ann P. Myles, Largo, Maryland, for Appellant. Robert G. Ames,Connie N. Bertram, VENABLE, BAETJER, HOWARD & CIVILETTI, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Victoria A. Jedrowicz appeals district court orders entered in the course of her litigating two complaints against Giant Foods, Incorporated. In No. 00-1941, we have reviewed the record and the district court orders and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Jedrowicz v. Giant Food, Inc., No. CA-96-3562-WMN (D. Md. June 7, 2000). Likewise, in No. 01-1133, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Jedrowicz v. Giant Food, Inc. , No. CA-98-3899-WMN (D. Md. Dec. 21, 2000). In No. 01-1133, we grant Appellee’s motion to file an attachment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Artur Zaytsev, Respondent, v Stanacard, LLC, Appellant.

[963 NYS2d 188]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (James A. Yates, J.), entered January 25, 2011, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Order, same court (O. Peter Sherwood, J.), entered June 18, 2012, which granted plaintiffs oral application on the record, seeking leave to voluntarily discontinue the action, without prejudice, pursuant to CPLR 3217 (b), and in accordance with a notice of discontinuance filed with the court, dated June 13, 2012, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

When viewing the evidence and construing all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmovant, as is required on a summary judgment motion *(see Dabbagh v Newmark Knight Frank Global Mgt. Servs., LLC,*99 AD3d 448 [1st Dept 2012]), the documentary evidence in the form of, inter alia, a partially executed 2008 “Joinder Agreement,” December 2009 emails from defendant’s officers and plaintiffs own averments, raises triable issues of fact whether plaintiff reasonably believed that defendant’s lone principal was authorized to procure for plaintiff a 10% membership interest in defendant limited liability company.

Although defendant argues the court should have directed plaintiff to file a formal motion seeking a discontinuance, the record reveals that defendant had ample notice of plaintiff’s intent to seek a discontinuance if, as transpired, plaintiffs application for removal of the action to federal court was unsuccessful. The record also demonstrates that defendant’s arguments below for severance of its counterclaim for a declaratory judgment in the event of a grant of the discontinuance application reflected not only an opportunity by defendant to be heard on the application, but defendant’s thorough understanding of the potential merits of its severance request *(see generally Osowski v AMEC Constr. Mgt., Inc.,*69 AD3d 99 [1st Dept 2009]). The court correctly declined to sever defendant’s counterclaim, as there was no necessity for the court to consider the counterclaim, inasmuch as it, in essence, sought a declaration that certain legal defenses were viable, and such defenses would be entertained in the new federal action *(see generally*
      *498
      *James v Alderton Dock Yards,*256 NY 298 [1931]; *Slowmach Realty Corp. v Leopold,*236 App Div 330 [1st Dept 1932]; *Piedmont Hotel Co. v Nettleton Co.,*241 App Div 562 [4th Dept 1934]).

We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur—Gonzalez, EJ., Friedman, AbdusSalaam, Román and Clark, JJ.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

The Honorable Richard Seeborg, United States District Judge for the ***

Northern District of California, sitting by designation.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

TOSHIAKI ITO,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-71496

Agency No. A095-297-304

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted August 29, 2011** 

Pasadena, California

Before: SCHROEDER and GOULD, Circuit Judges, and SEEBORG, District

Judge.*** 

Toshiaki Ito, a native and citizen of Japan, petitions for review of a decision

of the Board of Immigration Appeals summarily affirming an Immigration Judge’s

FILED

SEP 09 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

(“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal and protection

under the Convention Against Torture. Ito claims that he fears future persecution

on account of his sexual orientation. 

Petitioner has not established that he suffered any past persecution on that

account, nor has he established any circumstances indicating that he would suffer

future persecution if he returned. The record shows that the petitioner traveled

back and forth between the United States and Japan several times in the years

preceding his filing of his application, and the testimony of his own expert fails to

establish persecution on account of homosexuality in Japan. Ito has not presented

any evidence of severe harm that would rise to a level of persecution. See Hoxha

v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179 (9th Cir. 2003). For similar reasons, Ito did not show a

likelihood that he would be tortured if returned to Japan.

Finally, Ito’s assertion that the IJ did not properly consider and weigh all the

evidence and testimony does not raise a colorable due process claim. MartinezRosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir. 2005).

The petition for review is DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                               
<ARTICLE>                                   5
<LEGEND>                         
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
Partnership's  unaudited financial  statements for the period ended December 31,
1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>                        
<MULTIPLIER>                            1,000
                                     
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 Sep-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                      Dec-31-1998
<CASH>                                  1,138
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                               0
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        1,138
<PP&E>                                  5,038
<DEPRECIATION>                          1,619
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          4,562
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      44
<BONDS>                                 1,083
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<COMMON>                                    0
<OTHER-SE>                              3,435
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            4,562
<SALES>                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          630
<CGS>                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             207
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         30
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           393
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       393
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                              393
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           18.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                           18.04
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 10.12**

 

ANDREW CORPORATION

EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE BENEFIT PLAN AGREEMENT

 

THIS AGREEMENT, made this 5th day of July, 2004, by and between AndrewCorporation (the “Company”) and J.C. Huang (the “Executive”),

 

WITNESSETH:

 

WHEREAS, the Company maintains the Andrew Corporation ExecutiveSeverance Benefit Plan, as amended and restated effective May 14, 2004 (the“Plan”); and

 

WHEREAS, the Executive has been designated as an eligible participantin the Plan;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Executive and Company hereby agree as follows:

 

1.                                       PlanBenefits.  The Executive has beendesignated as a TIER II Participant in the Plan and shall be eligible solelyfor the benefits set forth therein applicable to TIER II Participants.  The receipt of such benefits shall besubject to all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Plan, including,but not limited to, terms related to the amount, time and form ofbenefits.  By execution of thisAgreement, the Executive agrees to be bound by the provisions of the Plan, asamended and restated effective May 14, 2004, and as may be subsequentlyamended.

 

2.                                       Arbitration.  The Executive acknowledges thatSection 7.2 of the Plan contains an arbitration provision, and byexecution of this Agreement agrees to be bound by the terms of such arbitrationprovision.

 

3.                                       PlanNot Contract of Employment.  ThePlan does not constitute a contract of employment and nothing in the Plan shallbe construed to give the Executive the right to be retained by the Company orto any benefits not specifically provided by the Plan.

 

4.                                       PlanSupercedes Prior Change in Control Severance Agreements.  The Executive acknowledges and agrees thatthe benefits and terms set forth in the May 14, 2004 restatement of the Plan,as applicable to the Participant based on the Tier designated in paragraph 1above, are a replacement for and in lieu of any benefits to which the Executivemay have been entitled under the Plan prior to its restatement or under anyother agreement with the Company relating to Change in Control severancebenefits.  The Executive furtheracknowledges such benefits and terms may be subsequently amended pursuant toSection 7.1 of the Plan.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to beexecuted as of the date first above written.

 
| EXECUTIVE             | ANDREW CORPORATION                           |
|-----------------------|----------------------------------------------|
|                  |                                         |
|                  |                                         |
| /s/   J.C. Huang |                                         | /s/ Ralph E. Faison |   |
| , individually        |                                         | By: Ralph E. Faison |
|                  | Its: President & Chief Executive Officer |
|                       |                                              |  |  |  |

 

----