Adequate Review Sample Clauses

Adequate Review. Seller hereby represents and warrants to the Issuer and the Buyer that: (i) it has been advised by the Issuer to review the periodic reports, and filings made by the Issuer under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 together with other public filings the Issuer has made on the SEC XXXXX system; (ii) that all documents, records, and books pertaining to the acquisition of the Shares as may have been requested by the Seller have been made available or delivered to, and have been examined by, the Seller; (iii) it has received all of the information it has requested from Buyer or Issuer that it considers necessary or appropriate for deciding whether to acquire the Shares; (iv) it has had an opportunity to ask questions and receive answers from Buyer and Issuer regarding the Shares; (v) it has not relied upon the Issuer, the Buyer or any of their respective representatives for any such investigation or assessment of risk; and (v) it understands the significant risks of this investment, including but not limited to the fact that the value of the Shares can increase or decrease after the date of issuance.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Adequate Review. You are hereby advised to consult with an attorney before signing this letter agreement. You acknowledge that you have read and fully understand the terms and conditions of this letter agreement. You further acknowledge that you have entered into this letter agreement voluntarily and not as the result of coercion, duress or undue influence. Additionally, you acknowledge that you have been afforded a period of at least twenty-one (21) days to consider this letter agreement. Modifications to this letter agreement, whether material or non-material, do not restart the aforementioned period.
Adequate Review. Each party represents to the other that, as deemed necessary by such party, this Agreement has been reviewed by each party and its legal and other advisors, and such party has had an opportunity to make all relevant inquiries and receive sufficient responses relating to this Agreement.
Adequate Review. Each Seller Party hereby represents and warrants to the Issuer and the Buyer that: (i) they have been advised by the Issuer to review the periodic reports, and filings made by the Issuer under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 together with other public filings the Issuer has made on the SEC XXXXX system; (ii) that all documents, records, and books pertaining to the Parent’s acquisition of the Shares and the Warrants as may have been requested by the Sellers and/or the Parent have been made available or delivered to, and have been examined by, the Sellers and the Parent; (iii) they have received all of the information it has requested from Buyer or Issuer that they consider necessary or appropriate for deciding whether to acquire the Shares or Warrants; (iv) they have had an opportunity to ask questions and receive answers from Buyer and Issuer regarding the Shares and Warrants; (v) they have not relied upon the Issuer, the Buyer or any of their respective representatives for any such investigation or assessment of risk; and (v) they understand the significant risks of this investment, including but not limited to the fact that the value of the Shares, Warrants and Warrant Shares can increase or decrease after the date of issuance.

Related to Adequate Review

  • Compliance Review During the Term, Developer agrees to permit the GLO, HUD, and/or a designated representative of the GLO or HUD to access the Property for the purpose of performing Compliance-Monitoring Procedures. In accordance with GLO Compliance-Monitoring Procedures, the GLO or HUD will periodically monitor and audit Developer’s compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, the CDBG-DR Regulations, the CDBG Multifamily Rental Housing Guidelines, and any and all other Governmental Requirements during the Term. In conducting any compliance reviews, the GLO or HUD will rely primarily on information obtained from Developer’s records and reports, on-site monitoring, and audit reports. The GLO or HUD may also consider other relevant information gained from other sources, including litigation and citizen complaints. 5.04 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: INDEMNIFICATION (a) Developer agrees to the following. (i) Developer shall not receive, store, dispose, or release any Hazardous Materials on or to the Property; transport any Hazardous Materials to or from the Property; or permit the existence of any Hazardous Material contamination on the Property. (ii) Developer shall give written notice to the GLO immediately when Developer acquires knowledge of the presence of any Hazardous Material on the Property; the transport of any Hazardous Materials to or from the Property; or the existence of any Hazardous Material contamination on the Property, with a full description thereof. (iii) Developer will promptly, at Developer’s sole cost and expense, comply with any Governmental Requirements regarding the removal, treatment, or disposal of such Hazardous Materials or Hazardous Material contamination and provide the GLO with satisfactory evidence of such compliance. (iv) Developer shall provide the GLO, within thirty (30) days of demand by the GLO, financial assurance evidencing to the GLO that the necessary funds are available to pay for the cost of removing, treating, and disposing of such Hazardous Materials or Hazardous Material contamination and discharging any assessments that may be established on the Property as a result thereof. (v) Developer shall insure that all leases, licenses, and agreements of any kind (whether written or oral) now or hereafter executed that permit any party to occupy, possess, or use in any way the Property or any part thereof include an express prohibition on the disposal or discharge of any Hazardous Materials at the Property and a provision stating that failure to comply with such prohibition shall expressly constitute a default under any such agreement. (vi) Developer shall not cause or suffer any liens (including any so-called state, federal, or local “Superfund” lien relating to such matters) to be recorded against the Property as a consequence of, or in any way related to, the presence, remediation, or disposal of Hazardous Materials in or about the Property. (b) DEVELOPER SHALL, AT ALL TIMES, RETAIN ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES ARISING FROM THE PRESENCE, HANDLING, TREATMENT, STORAGE, TRANSPORTATION, REMOVAL, OR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ON THE PROPERTY. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER ANY EVENT OF DEFAULT OCCURS OR CONTINUES, WHETHER THE GLO EXERCISES ANY REMEDIES IN RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY, OR SUCH SITUATION RELATED TO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS WAS CAUSED BY OR WITHIN THE CONTROL OF DEVELOPER OR THE GLO, DEVELOPER SHALL DEFEND, INDEMNIFY, AND HOLD HARMLESS THE GLO AND ITS OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES FROM AND AGAINST ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES, SUITS, ACTIONS, CLAIMS, DEMANDS, PENALTIES, DAMAGES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOST PROFITS, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, INTEREST, PENALTIES, FINES, AND MONETARY SANCTIONS), LOSSES, COSTS, AND EXPENSES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, REASONABLE ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS) THAT MAY: (i) NOW OR IN THE FUTURE (WHETHER BEFORE OR AFTER THE CULMINATION OF THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED BY THIS AGREEMENT) BE INCURRED OR SUFFERED BY THE GLO BY REASON OF, RESULTING FROM, IN CONNECTION WITH, OR ARISING IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER FROM THE BREACH OF ANY WARRANTY OR COVENANT IN THIS SECTION OR THE INACCURACY OF ANY REPRESENTATION OF DEVELOPER IN RELATION TO THIS AGREEMENT;

  • Prior Review (a) With respect to each contract for the employment of consulting firms estimated to cost the equivalent of $100,000 or more, the procedures set forth in paragraphs 1, 2 (other than the third subparagraph of paragraph 2(a)) and 5 of Appendix 1 to the Consultant Guidelines shall apply. (b) With respect to each contract for the employment of individual consultants estimated to cost the equivalent of $50,000 or more, the qualifications, experience, terms of reference and terms of employment of the consultants shall be furnished to the Association for its prior review and approval. The contract shall be awarded only after the said approval shall have been given.

  • Reviews (a) During the term of this Agreement and for 7 years after the term of this Agreement, the HSP agrees that the Funder or its authorized representatives may conduct a Review of the HSP to confirm the HSP’s fulfillment of its obligations under this Agreement. For these purposes the Funder or its authorized representatives may, upon 24 hours’ Notice to the HSP and during normal business hours enter the HSP’s premises to: inspect and copy any financial records, invoices and other finance- related documents, other than personal health information as defined in the Enabling Legislation, in the possession or under the control of the HSP which relate to the Funding or otherwise to the Services; and inspect and copy non-financial records, other than personal health information as defined in the Enabling Legislation, in the possession or under the control of the HSP which relate to the Funding, the Services or otherwise to the performance of the HSP under this Agreement. (b) The cost of any Review will be borne by the HSP if the Review: (1) was made necessary because the HSP did not comply with a requirement under the Enabling Legislation or this Agreement; or (2) indicates that the HSP has not fulfilled its obligations under this Agreement, including its obligations under Applicable Law and Applicable Policy. (c) To assist in respect of the rights set out in (a) above, the HSP shall disclose any information requested by the Funder or its authorized representatives and shall do so in a form requested by the Funder or its authorized representatives. (d) The HSP may not commence a proceeding for damages or otherwise against any person with respect to any act done or omitted to be done, any conclusion reached or report submitted that is done in good faith in respect of a Review.

  • Independent Review Contractor shall provide the Secretary of ADS/CIO an independent expert review of any Agency recommendation for any information technology activity when its total cost is $1,000,000.00 or greater or when CIO requires one. The State has identified two sub-categories for Independent Reviews, Standard and Complex. The State will identify in the SOW RFP the sub-category they are seeking. State shall not consider bids greater than the maximum value indicated below for this category. Standard Independent Review $25,000 Maximum Complex Independent Review $50,000 Maximum Per Vermont statute 3 V.S.A. 2222, The Secretary of Administration shall obtain independent expert review of any recommendation for any information technology initiated after July 1, 1996, as information technology activity is defined by subdivision (a) (10), when its total cost is $1,000,000 or greater or when required by the State Chief Information Officer. Documentation of this independent review shall be included when plans are submitted for review pursuant to subdivisions (a)(9) and (10) of this section. The independent review shall include: • An acquisition cost assessment • A technology architecture review • An implementation plan assessment • A cost analysis and model for benefit analysis • A procurement negotiation advisory services contract • An impact analysis on net operating costs for the agency carrying out the activity In addition, from time to time special reviews of the advisability and feasibility of certain types of IT strategies may be required. Following are Requirements and Capabilities for this Service: • Identify acquisition and lifecycle costs; • Assess wide area network (WAN) and/or local area network (LAN) impact; • Assess risks and/or review technical risk assessments of an IT project including security, data classification(s), subsystem designs, architectures, and computer systems in terms of their impact on costs, benefits, schedule and technical performance; • Assess, evaluate and critically review implementation plans, e.g.: • Adequacy of support for conversion and implementation activities • Adequacy of department and partner staff to provide Project Management • Adequacy of planned testing procedures • Acceptance/readiness of staff • Schedule soundness • Adequacy of training pre and post project • Assess proposed technical architecture to validate conformance to the State’s “strategic direction.” • Insure system use toolsets and strategies are consistent with State Chief Information Officer (CIO) policies, including security and digital records management; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to security and systems integration with other applications within the Department, and within the Agency, and existing or planned Enterprise Applications; • Perform cost and schedule risk assessments to support various alternatives to meet mission need, recommend alternative courses of action when one or more interdependent segment(s) or phase(s) experience a delay, and recommend opportunities for new technology insertions; • Assess the architecture of the proposed hardware and software with regard to the state of the art in this technology. • Assess a project’s backup/recovery strategy and the project’s disaster recovery plans for adequacy and conformance to State policy. • Evaluate the ability of a proposed solution to meet the needs for which the solution has been proposed, define the ability of the operational and user staff to integrate this solution into their work.

  • Review The practitioner reviews the treatment plan and discusses, when appropriate, case circumstances and management options with the attending (or referring) physician. The reviewer consults with the requesting physician when more clarity is needed to make an informed coverage decision. The reviewer may consult with board certified physicians from appropriate specialty areas to assist in making determinations of coverage and/or appropriateness. All such consultations will be documented in the review text. If the reviewer determines that the admission, continued stay or service requested is not a covered service, a notice of non-coverage is issued. Only a physician, behavioral health practitioner (such as a psychiatrist, doctoral-level clinical psychologist, certified addiction medicine specialist), dentist or pharmacist who has the clinical expertise appropriate to the request under review with an unrestricted license may deny coverage based on medical necessity.

  • BUSINESS REVIEWS Supplier must perform a minimum of one business review with Sourcewell per contract year. The business review will cover sales to Participating Entities, pricing and contract terms, administrative fees, sales data reports, performance issues, supply issues, customer issues, and any other necessary information.

  • Agreement Review If, pursuant to section 25.10 (Review of Agreement) of the Bilateral Agreement, the Bilateral Agreement is reviewed after three or five years, or both, of the effective date of the Bilateral Agreement, and any changes to the Bilateral Agreement are required as a result, the Parties agree to amend the Agreement as necessary and in a manner that is consistent with such changes.

  • Examination and Review (i) After receipt of the Closing Working Capital Statement, Seller will have *** (***) days from the date on which Buyer has provided to Seller all access and information reasonably requested for such purposes (the “Review Period”) to review the Closing Working Capital Statement. During the Review Period, Seller and its accountants will have full access to the relevant books and records of Buyer, the personnel of, and work papers prepared by, Buyer and/or Buyer’s accountants to the extent that they relate to the Closing Working Capital Statement and to such historical financial information (to the extent in Buyer’s possession) relating to the Closing Working Capital Statement as Seller may reasonably request for the purpose of reviewing the Closing Working Capital Statement and to prepare a Statement of Objections. (ii) On or prior to the last day of the Review Period, Seller may object to the Closing Working Capital Statement by delivering to Buyer a written statement setting forth Seller’s objections in reasonable detail, indicating each disputed item or amount and the basis for Seller’s disagreement therewith (the “Statement of Objections”). If Seller fails to deliver the Statement of Objections before the expiration of the Review Period, then the Closing Working Capital Statement and the Post-Closing Adjustment, as the case may be, reflected in the Closing Working Capital Statement will be deemed to have been accepted by Seller. If Seller delivers the Statement of Objections before the expiration of the Review Period, Buyer and Seller will negotiate in good faith to resolve such objections within *** (***) days after the delivery of the Statement of Objections (the “Resolution Period”), and, if the same are so resolved within the Resolution Period, then the Post-Closing Adjustment and the Closing Working Capital Statement with such changes as may have been previously agreed in writing by Buyer and Seller, will be final and binding.

  • Study An application for leave of absence for professional study must be supported by a written statement indicating what study or research is to be undertaken, or, if applicable, what subjects are to be studied and at what institutions.

  • AUDIT REVIEW PROCEDURES Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this AGREEMENT that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration. Not later than thirty (30) calendar days after issuance of the final audit report, CONSULTANT may request a review by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration of unresolved audit issues. The request for review will be submitted in writing. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by ALAMEDA CTC will excuse CONSULTANT from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT and subconsultants’ contracts, including cost proposals and ICRs, may be subject to audits or reviews such as, but not limited to, an AGREEMENT Audit, an Incurred Cost Audit, an ICR Audit, or a certified public accountant (“CPA”) ICR Audit Workpaper Review. If selected for audit or review, the AGREEMENT, cost proposal and ICR and related workpapers, if applicable, will be reviewed to verify compliance with 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 and other related laws and regulations. In the instances of a CPA ICR Audit Workpaper Review it is CONSULTANT’s responsibility to ensure federal, state, or local government officials are allowed full access to the CPA’s workpapers including making copies as necessary. The AGREEMENT, cost proposal, and ICR shall be adjusted by CONSULTANT and approved by ALAMEDA CTC to conform to the audit or review recommendations. CONSULTANT agrees that individual terms of costs identified in the audit report shall be incorporated into the contract by this reference if directed by ALAMEDA CTC at its sole discretion. Refusal by CONSULTANT to incorporate audit or review recommendations, or to ensure that the federal, state, or local governments have access to CPA workpapers, will be considered a breach of contract terms and cause for termination of the AGREEMENT and disallowance of prior reimbursed costs.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!