alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.48



SEQUENOM, INC.



Description of Bonus Program



The Compensation Committee (the Committee) of the Board of Directors (the Board) of Sequenom, Inc.
(the Company) has approved a bonus program for the Companys executive officers. For the Companys Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Scientific Officer, Senior Vice Presidents and Vice
Presidents, the bonus program provides for an incentive cash compensation target equal to a percentage of each such participants base salary as follows:



|                                                                     |  |                                |  
|-------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------ | -
|Title                                                                |  | TargetPercentage ofBase Salary |  
|Chief Executive Officer                                              |  | 50                             | %
|Chief Financial Officer                                              |  | 30                             | %
|Chief Scientific Officer, Senior Vice Presidents and Vice Presidents |  | 25                             | %



For 2008, the target
percentages of base salary are as follows: 50% for Harry Stylli, Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer; 30% for Paul Hawran, Chief Financial Officer; and 25% for Charles R. Cantor, Ph.D., Chief Scientific Officer, Elizabeth Dragon, Ph.D., Senior Vice
President, Research and Development and Steven Owings, Vice President of Commercial Development, Prenatal Diagnostics, and 25% for all other Senior Vice Presidents and Vice Presidents.



Under the program, after the completion of each fiscal year the Committee determines for approval for each executive a bonus
that will be equal to an amount from 0 to 100% of the applicable target amount. In making its determination, in addition to individual performance considerations, the Committee assesses the level of achievement of specific Company goals for a
particular year which are weighted with a percentage for purposes of relevance to annual bonus achievement. These criteria include the achievement of specific financial targets, milestones within the Companys diagnostic business, milestones
within the Companys genomic analysis business and other key business development objectives as a whole.



For 2008, the Companys overall goals were weighted for financial objectives, for diagnostic business objectives, for genomic analysis business
objectives and for business development objectives. The Companys 2008 financial goals include the achievement of specific revenue targets, total cash burn amounts and overall gross margin objectives. The Companys goals with respect to
its diagnostic business include the completion of specific research, development and commercial milestones. The Companys goals with respect to its genomic analysis business include technology development objectives.
Benjamin SCHWARZ, petitioner, v. Erwin MEINBERG, et al.

No. 15-9345.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
International Dial-In Numbers 

Three Lafayette Centre 

1155 21st Street, NW

Washington, DC 20581 

PASSCODE: 4136858 

Country Toll Numbers Freephone/

Toll Free Number

ARGENTINA 0800-444-0891 

AUSTRALIA ADELAIDE: 61-8-8121-5054 1-800-027-350 

AUSTRALIA BRISBANE: 61-7-3102-2043 1-800-027-350 

AUSTRALIA CANBERRA: 61-2-6100-0105 1-800-027-350 

AUSTRALIA MELBOURNE: 61-3-9010-0854 1-800-027-350 

AUSTRALIA PERTH: 61-8-9467-5282 1-800-027-350 

AUSTRALIA SYDNEY: 61-2-8209-1531 1-800-027-350 

AUSTRIA 43-1-92-81-450 0800-005-805 

BELGIUM 32-2-400-9833 0800-3-8929 

BRAZIL RIO DE JANEIRO: 55-21-40421433 0800-7610654 

BRAZIL SAO PAULO: 55-11-3958-0778 0800-7610654 

CANADA 866-845-8493 

CHILE 1230-020-5986 

CHINA CHINA A: 86-400-810-4796 10800-712-2423 

CHINA CHINA B: 86-400-810-4796 10800-120-2423 

COLOMBIA 01800-9-157005 

CROATIA 080-08-06-410 

CZECH REPUBLIC 420-2-25-98-56-26 800-700-241 

DENMARK 45-7014-0294 8088-2739 

EGYPT 0800000-9037 

ESTONIA 800-011-1126 

FINLAND 358-9-5424-7157 0-800-9-14619 

FRANCE LYON: 33-4-26-03-51-62 080-510-2764 

FRANCE MARSEILLE: 33-4-86-06-48-62 080-510-2764 

FRANCE PARIS: 33-1-72-25-40-65 080-510-2764 

GERMANY 49-69-2222-4866 0800-800-1420 

GREECE 30-80-1-100-0647 00800-12-8034 

HONG KONG 852-3001-3890 800-963-172 

HUNGARY 36-1-700-8827 06-800-11152 

INDONESIA 007-803-011-0169 

IRELAND 353-1-506-0475 1800-936-202 

ISRAEL 1-80-9212604 

ITALY MILAN: 39-02-3604-6279 800-977-454 

ITALY ROME: 39-06-8751-6068 800-977-454 

ITALY TORINO: 39-011-510-0168 800-977-454 

JAPAN OSAKA: 81-6-7878-2610 0066-33-812353 

JAPAN TOKYO: 81-3-6868-2610 0066-33-812353 

LATVIA 8000-3206 

LUXEMBOURG 352-27-000-1392 8002-9169 

MALAYSIA 1-800-81-4674 

MEXICO GUADALAJARA (JAL): 52-33-3208-7366 001-866-944-7658 

MEXICO MEXICO CITY: 52-55-5062-9166 001-866-944-7658 

MEXICO MONTERREY: 52-81-2482-0666 001-866-944-7658 
Country Toll Numbers Freephone/

Toll Free Number

NETHERLANDS 31-20-716-8075 0800-020-0350 

NEW ZEALAND 64-9-970-4640 0800-456-285 

NORWAY 47-21-590-067 800-10580 

PANAMA 011-001-800-5072373 

PERU 0800-53785 

PHILIPPINES 63-2-858-3759 1800-111-42417 

POLAND 00-800-1213477 

PORTUGAL 351-2-10054708 8008-14925 

ROMANIA 40-31-630-01-34

RUSSIA 8-10-8002-5624011 

SAUDI ARABIA 800-8-110059 

SINGAPORE 65-6883-9196 800-120-5221 

SLOVAK REPUBLIC 421-2-322-422-78 0800-002074 

SLOVENIA 0-800-81359 

SOUTH AFRICA 080-09-82147 

SOUTH KOREA 82-2-6744-1051 00798-14800-7786 

SPAIN 34-91-414-21-71 800-300-906 

SWEDEN 46-8-503-34-824 0200-899-945 

SWITZERLAND 41-44-580-4320 0800-001-428 

TAIWAN 886-2-2795-7345 00801-136-036 

THAILAND 001-800-1206-66632 

TURKEY 00-800-151-0810 

UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 8000-35702387 

UNITED KINGDOM BIRMINGHAM: 44-121-210-9182 0808-238-9816 

UNITED KINGDOM GLASGOW: 44-141-202-0812 0808-238-9816 

UNITED KINGDOM LEEDS: 44-113-301-0012 0808-238-9816 

UNITED KINGDOM LONDON: 44-20-7950-1256 0808-238-9816 

UNITED KINGDOM MANCHESTER: 44-161-601-0112 0808-238-9816 

URUGUAY 000-413-598-3837 

USA 1-203-369-5026 866-844-9416 

VENEZUELA 0800-1-00-2884 

VIETNAM 120-11746
Thomas R. SOCHA, petitioner, v. Reed A. RICHARDSON, Warden.

No. 17-8519.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
Barry Alan LAYTON, petitioner, v. Steven K. BORDIN, Chief Probation Officer, Butte County.

No. 17-990.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 5, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3818 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3818

     To require the Secretary of Agriculture to allow infant food 
            combinations and dinners as WIC-eligible foods.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 17, 2019

  Mr. Young introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To require the Secretary of Agriculture to allow infant food 
            combinations and dinners as WIC-eligible foods.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Infants Need Food And Nutrition 
Today Act'' or the ``INFANT Act''.

SEC. 2. INFANT FOOD COMBINATIONS AND DINNERS.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the 
enactment of this section, the Secretary of Agriculture shall allow 
infant food combinations and dinners to be eligible to be served under 
the supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children 
under section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786).
    (b) Revision of Regulations.--The Secretary of Agriculture shall 
issue and revise regulations in accordance with subsection (a).
                                 <all>
```
# L_2005066EN.01002802.xml

| 12.3.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 66/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 66/28

---

Notice of the date of entry into force of Decision No 1/2005 of the EU-Mexico Joint Council, concerning a corrigendum to Decision No 3/2004 of the EU-Mexico Joint Council of 29 July 2004

The contracting parties having notified one another of the completion of the procedures required for entry into force of Decision No 1/2005 of the EU-Mexico Joint Council, concerning a corrigendum to Decision No 3/2004 of the EU-Mexico Joint Council of 29 July 2004, as approved by the Council of the European Union at its meeting on 31 January 2005. The Decision will enter into force with effect from 21 February 2005, in accordance with Article 2 thereof.

---
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JU NE 21, 2019

NO. 03

- 18

- 00358

- CV

Lynn Sheen, Appellant

v.

Nicholas Sheen, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 419TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES GOODWIN, BA KER, AND SMI TH

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE SMITH

This is an appeal from the judgment signed by the tr i a l court on February 22, 20 18. Having

reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the C ourt holds that there was no reversible error

in the trial court’s judgment . Therefore, the C ourt affirms the trial court’s judgment

. The

appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appe al, both in this Court and in the court below.
# C_2009069EN.01005403.xml

| 21.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/54 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/54

---

Action brought on 2 February 2009 — Fares v Commission

(Case F-6/09)

(2009/C 69/121)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Soukaïna Fares (Berchem-Sainte-Agathe, Belgium) (represented by: L. Vogel, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the decision to classify the applicant in function group III, grade 8.

Form of order sought

The applicant claims the Tribunal should:

| — | Annul the decision adopted by the Authority Authorised to Conclude Contracts on 17 October, by which it rejected the complaint brought by the applicant on 21 June 2008 seeking annulment of the decision classifying the applicant in function group III, at grade 8, and applying for entitlement for classification at grade 9, with effect on the same date; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision adopted by the Authority Authorised to Conclude Contracts on 17 October, by which it rejected the complaint brought by the applicant on 21 June 2008 seeking annulment of the decision classifying the applicant in function group III, at grade 8, and applying for entitlement for classification at grade 9, with effect on the same date;

| — | So far as necessary, also annul the original decision, by which the applicant was classified in function group III, at grade 8; |
| --- | --- |

—

So far as necessary, also annul the original decision, by which the applicant was classified in function group III, at grade 8;

| — | Order the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Commission of the European Communities to pay the costs.

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 99.1


                                        Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.


Coopers
& Lybrand (logo)                        a professional services firm




INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT


Board of Directors and Stockholder
Metwest Mortgage Services, Inc.
Spokane, Washington


     We have examined management's assertion about Metwest Mortgage Services,
Inc.'s (d/b/a) Metwest Services)(the Company) compliance with the minimum
servicing standards identified in Mortgage Bankers Association of America's
Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers (USAP) as of and for the
year ended September 30, 1996, included in the accompanying management
assertion. Management is responsible for the Company's compliance with those
minimum servicing standards. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
management's assertion about the entity's compliance based on our examination.

     Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Company's compliance with the
minimum servicing standards and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a
legal determination of the Company's compliance with the minimum servicing
standards.

     In our opinion, management's assertion that Metwest Mortgage Services, Inc.
complied with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the
year ended September 30, 1996 is fairly stated in all material respects.

/s/ Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
----------------------------

Spokane, Washington
November 27, 1996
Andre Levon GLOVER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-8777.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ of certiorari granted. The judgment is vacated, and case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for further consideration in light of *Sessions v. Dimaya,* 584 U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 1204, 200 L.Ed.2d 549 (2018).
WYOMING, petitioner, v. Phillip SAM.

No. 17-952.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Wyoming denied.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 12, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 21640]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07712]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


Civil Nuclear Trade Advisory Committee

AGENCY: International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of an open meeting; cancellation.

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

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the cancellation of a meeting of the 
Civil Nuclear Trade Advisory Committee (CINTAC). The meeting was 
cancelled due to members not yet being ready to discuss a proposed 
recommendation on civil nuclear financing.

DATES: The meeting scheduled for Wednesday, March 23, 2022 from 11:00 
a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) was cancelled.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jonathan Chesebro, Office of 
Energy & Environmental Industries, International Trade Administration 
(Phone: 202-482-1297; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#600a0f0e011408010e4e030805130502120f2014120104054e070f16"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="650f0a0b04110d040b4b060d00160007170a2511170401004b020a13">[email protected]</span></a>).

    Dated: April 6, 2022.
Man Cho,
Deputy Director, Office of Energy and Environmental Industries.
[FR Doc. 2022-07712 Filed 4-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO
                  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                               SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



     The undersigned  executive  officers of the Registrant  hereby certify that
this  Annual  Report  on Form  10-K for the  year  ended  March  31,  2004  (the
"Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities  Exchange Act of 1934,  and the  information  contained in the Report
fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial condition and results
of operations of the Registrant.


                             By: /s/ John D. Doherty
                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                 John D. Doherty
                                 Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer



                             By: /s/ Michael K. Devlin
                                 -----------------------------------------------
                                 Michael K. Devlin
                                 Senior Vice President, Treasurer
                                 and Chief Financial Officer



Date:  June 25, 2004
Artis ANDERSON, petitioner, v. Vanessa M. DICKSON, et al.

No. 17-7807.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 16, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-18-00081-CR

TREKEYMIAN JAMAL ALLISON, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 188th District Court

Gregg County, Texas

Trial Court No. 46,569-A

Before Morriss, C.J., Moseley and Burgess, JJ.
2

O R D E R

Court reporter Grelyn Freeman recorded the trial court proceedings in appellate cause 

number 06-18-00081-CR, styled Trekeymian Jamal Allison v. The State of Texas, trial court cause 

number 46,569-A in the 188th Judicial District Court of Gregg County, Texas. The reporter’s 

record was originally due in these matters on July 3, 2018. That deadline was extended twice by 

this Court, on Freeman’s motions, resulting in the most recent due date of August 22, 2018. 

Although we warned Freeman that additional requests to extend the filing deadline would not be 

granted, she has nonetheless filed a third request for an extension of the filing deadline.

The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure establish that “trial and appellate courts are jointly 

responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed.” TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(c). The 

Rules further instruct that an “appellate court may enter any order necessary to ensure the timely 

filing of the appellate record.” Id. In furtherance of our responsibilities established by the Rules, 

we find we must take steps to ensure that the record in this case is filed in a reasonable amount of 

time.

Therefore, we order Freeman to file the reporter’s record in cause number 06-18-00081-

CR, styled Trekeymian Jamal Allison v. The State of Texas, trial court cause number 46,569-A in 

the 188th Judicial District Court of Gregg County, Texas, to be received no later than Friday, 

September 7, 2018.

If the reporter’s record is not received by September 7, we warn Freeman that we may 

begin contempt proceedings and order her to show cause why she should not be held in contempt 

of this Court for failing to obey its order.
3

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: August 28, 2018
Diane HOLBROOK, petitioner, v. RONNIES LLC.

No. 17-798.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 16, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
# C_2013114EN.01000701.xml

| 20.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/7

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 28 February 2013 — European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-556/10) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Transport - Development of the Community’s railways - Directive 91/440/EEC - Article 6(3) and Annex II - Directive 2001/14/EC - Articles 4(2) and 14(2) - Infrastructure manager - Organisational and decision-making independence - Holding company structure - Directive 2001/14 - Articles 7(3) and 8(1) - Setting charges on the basis of direct costs - Levying of charges - Direct costs - Total costs - Directive 2001/14 - Article 6(2) - No incentive to reduce costs - Directive 91/440 - Article 10(7) - Directive 2001/14 - Article 30(4) - Regulatory body - Powers)

2013/C 114/07

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braun and H. Støvlbæk, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze, J. Möller and N. Graf Vitzthum, acting as Agents, and R. Van der Hout, advocaat)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek, J. Očková and T. Müller, acting as Agents), Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, acting as Agent, and S. Fiorentino, avvocato dello Stato)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to adopt within the prescribed period all the necessary provisions to comply with Article 6(3) of and Annex II to Council Directive 91/440/EEC of 29 July 1991 on the development of the Community’s railways (OJ 1991 L 237, p. 25) and Articles 2, 6(2), 7(3), 8(1), 14(2) and 30(4) of Directive 2001/14/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2001 on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification (OJ 2001 L 75, p. 29)

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs;

| 3. | Orders the Czech Republic and the Italian Republic to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Czech Republic and the Italian Republic to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 38, 5.2.2011.

1

---
*

Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

________________ No. 95-31097 Summary Calendar

________________
DIANE WILLIS, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus INTEROCEAN MANAGEMENT; ET AL, Defendants, and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, represented by the Secretary of Transportation, acting through the Maritime Administrator Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 94-CV-2701-E

_________________________________________________________________ July 30, 1996 Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges
PER CURIAM: *

Dia ne Willis appeals from the dismissal of a complaint filed under the Suits in Admiralty Act for lack of subject matter2

jurisdiction. Willis contends that the doctrine of equitable tolling applies to toll the running of the applicable two-year
statute of limitations period. We have reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs and AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal for essentially the same reaso ns set forth by the district court. Willis v. Interoc ean Management , No. 94-CV-2701-E (E.D. La. Oct. 31, 1995). Further, the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Henderson

v. United States ,
___ U.S. ___, 64 USLW 4362 (1996), which
overtur ned this court’s reading of the Suits in Admiralty Act requirement of “forthwith” service, United States v. Holmberg , 19 F.3d 1062 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 482 (1994), comes too late to help Ms. Willis. The issue in the instant appeal was not
t imeliness but equitable tolling, and H enderson does nothing to undermine the district court’s denial of equitable tolling.

AFFIRMED