Automated decisions For purposes hereof “automated decision” shall mean a decision by the data exporter or the data importer which produces legal effects concerning a data subject or significantly affects a data subject and which is based solely on automated processing of personal data intended to evaluate certain personal aspects relating to him, such as his performance at work, creditworthiness, reliability, conduct, etc. The data importer shall not make any automated decisions concerning data subjects, except when:
a) i. such decisions are made by the data importer in entering into or performing a contract with the data subject, and
Decision Making The Joint Development Committee and Joint Commercialization Committee shall each act by unanimous agreement of its members, with each Party having one vote. If the Joint Development Committee or Joint Commercialization Committee, after [* * *] (or such other period as the Parties may otherwise agree) of good faith efforts to reach a unanimous decision on an issue, fails to reach such a unanimous decision, then either Party may refer such issue to the Executive Officers. Such Executive Officers shall meet promptly thereafter and shall negotiate in good faith to resolve the issues. If Executive Officers cannot resolve such issue within [* * *] of referral of such issue to the Executive Officers, the resolution of such issue shall be as follows:
(a) if such issue properly originated at the Joint Development Committee, determined by the Developing Party of the relevant Licensed Compound or Licensed Product at issue; provided that, notwithstanding the foregoing:
(i) if Acceleron is the Developing Party and such issue relates to (x) the approval of an Additional Development Disease, or (y) matters under Section 5.6.3(d), then such issue shall be determined by [* * *];
(ii) regardless of which Party is the Developing Party, such issue shall be determined by [* * *] following the earliest of: (x) [* * *], and (y) the Joint Development Committee’s decision to go forward with a Phase 3 Clinical Trial of the relevant Licensed Compound or Licensed Product; provided that [* * *] shall continue to determine any issues that relate to the budget for and the conduct of the [* * *]; and
(iii) regardless of which Party is the Developing Party, such issue shall be determined by [* * *] following the earliest of: (x) [* * *], and (y) the occurrence of any [* * *]; and
(b) if such issue properly originated at the Joint Commercialization Committee, determined by Celgene. Notwithstanding the foregoing, none of Acceleron, Celgene, the Joint Development Committee or the Joint Commercialization Committee may make any decision inconsistent with the express terms of this Agreement without the prior written consent of each Party.
SITE-BASED DECISION MAKING A. The District shall provide the training and staff development to support accountability/site- based decision-making activities. Teachers shall be given release time to attend these programs.
B. Participation on the SAC shall not serve as a basis for the evaluation of any teacher.
C. A minimum of three (3) to a maximum of five (5) teachers from each school shall serve on their school’s budget advisory committee formed for the purpose of making recommendations on the school’s general fund budget. Teacher members shall be elected by the faculty. Minutes from such meetings may be requested by the faculty and may be posted on the CTA bulletin board at the school by the Association Representative.
Alternative Dispute Resolution Limitations This is a requirement of the TIPS Contract and is non-negotiable. No Waiver of TIPS Immunity This is a requirement of the TIPS Contract and is non-negotiable. 5 5 Payment Terms and Funding Out Clause This is a requirement of the TIPS Contract and is non-negotiable. 6
Negotiation; Alternative Dispute Resolution The Parties will attempt in good faith to resolve any dispute or controversy arising out of or relating to the performance of services under this Agreement. If the Parties are unable to resolve the dispute, then, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 21.36, Contractor may submit to the Contracting Officer a written request for administrative review and documentation of the Contractor's claim(s). Upon such request, the Contracting Officer shall promptly issue an administrative decision in writing, stating the reasons for the action taken and informing the Contractor of its right to judicial review. If agreed by both Parties in writing, disputes may be resolved by a mutually agreed-upon alternative dispute resolution process. If the parties do not mutually agree to an alternative dispute resolution process or such efforts do not resolve the dispute, then either Party may pursue any remedy available under California law. The status of any dispute or controversy notwithstanding, Contractor shall proceed diligently with the performance of its obligations under this Agreement in accordance with the Agreement and the written directions of the City. Neither Party will be entitled to legal fees or costs for matters resolved under this section.
Claim Decision Upon receipt of such claim, the Plan Administrator shall respond to such claimant within ninety (90) days after receiving the claim. If the Plan Administrator determines that special circumstances require additional time for processing the claim, the Plan Administrator can extend the response period by an additional ninety (90) days for reasonable cause by notifying the claimant in writing, prior to the end of the initial ninety (90) day period, that an additional period is required. The notice of extension must set forth the special circumstances and the date by which the Plan Administrator expects to render its decision. If the claim is denied in whole or in part, the Plan Administrator shall notify the claimant in writing of such denial. The Plan Administrator shall write the notification in a manner calculated to be understood by the claimant. The notification shall set forth:
(i) The specific reasons for the denial;
(ii) The specific reference to pertinent provisions of the Agreement on which the denial is based;
(iii) A description of any additional information or material necessary for the claimant to perfect the claim and an explanation of why such material or information is necessary;
(iv) Appropriate information as to the steps to be taken if the claimant wishes to submit the claim for review and the time limits applicable to such procedures; and
(v) A statement of the claimant’s right to bring a civil action under ERISA Section 502(a) following an adverse benefit determination on review.
Initial Decision Maker The Architect will serve as the Initial Decision Maker pursuant to Article 15 of AIA Document A201–2017, unless the parties appoint below another individual, not a party to this Agreement, to serve as the Initial Decision Maker.
Major Decisions (A) Subject to Sections 7.3(C) and 7.3(D) with respect to the Company, all major decisions of the Company set forth below in clauses (A)(1) through (A)(6) (“Major Decisions”) shall be subject to the Company’s Articles of Incorporation and joint approval by the Advisor and Sub-advisor. For the avoidance of doubt, Major Decisions specifically exclude any decisions regarding the day-to-day operations of the Company, the decision-making authority for which has been delegated to the Sub-advisor pursuant to this Agreement. Major Decisions shall consist of the following:
(1) Decisions to recommend to the Board of Directors that the Company acquire or sell Properties, Loans and other Permitted Investments;
(2) Retention of investment banks for the Company;
(3) Marketing methods for the Company’s sale of Shares;
(4) Extending, initiating or terminating the Initial Public Offering or any subsequent Offering of the Shares;
(5) Issuing press releases involving the major decisions of the Company or the Advisor or Sub-advisor or their Affiliates with respect to the business or operations of the Company; provided, that the Sub-advisor need not obtain consent to any press releases regarding acquisitions or dispositions of Properties, Loans or other Permitted Investments; and provided further, however, that notwithstanding the immediately preceding proviso, any mention of the Advisor or its Affiliates in such press releases regarding acquisitions or dispositions shall be pre-approved by the Advisor; and
(6) Merging or otherwise engaging in any change of control transaction for the Company.
(B) Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, if the Parties do not agree to any action constituting a Major Decision that is described in any of clauses (A)(2) through (A)(6) above and that has been proposed by either Party, the Parties shall meet (in person or by phone) to discuss the issue in dispute in good faith over the five-business day period beginning with the delivery of notice of the proposed action to the other Party.
(C) Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, with respect to Major Decisions described in clause (A)(1) above (but subject to Section 7.3(D)), (1) joint approval shall not be required, (2) the Sub-advisor and the Advisor shall discuss the proposed transaction (either in person or by phone) prior to either Party making any recommendation of the proposed transaction to the Board of Directors, and (3) the Sub-Advisor and the Advisor shall each give due consideration to the opinions of the other Party. Ordinarily, such discussions shall begin at least five business days before a recommendation is made to the Board of Directors; however, if in the sole discretion of the Sub-advisor it is in the best interest of the Company to make a recommendation to the Board of Directors more promptly, then the Sub-advisor may do so. In the event the Parties do not agree as to whether to recommend the proposed transaction to the Board of Directors, the Sub-advisor’s decision shall govern.
(D) Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 7.3 or any other provision in this Agreement to the contrary, in all events, including Major Decisions, the Company will be managed under the direction of the Board of Directors.
(E) Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary (but subject to Section 7.3(D)), the Sub-advisor shall have sole authority to act on behalf of the Company regarding amending the Advisory Agreement.
Arbitration Decisions Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, the arbitrator(s) shall render a decision within ninety (90) Calendar Days of appointment and shall notify the Parties in writing of such decision and the reasons therefor. The arbitrator(s) shall be authorized only to interpret and apply the provisions of this LGIA and shall have no power to modify or change any provision of this Agreement in any manner. The decision of the arbitrator(s) shall be final and binding upon the Parties, and judgment on the award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. The decision of the arbitrator(s) may be appealed solely on the grounds that the conduct of the arbitrator(s), or the decision itself, violated the standards set forth in the Federal Arbitration Act or the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act. The final decision of the arbitrator(s) must also be filed with FERC if it affects jurisdictional rates, terms and conditions of service, Interconnection Facilities, or Network Upgrades.
Alternative Dispute Resolution Prior to filing of litigation, the parties may select non-binding mediation as a method of conflict resolution for issues arising out of or relating to this procurement process or any contract resulting from or any contemplated transaction. The parties agree that if non-binding mediation is chosen as a resolution process, the parties must agree to the chosen mediator(s) and that all mediation venue shall be at a location in Xxx Xxxxx County, Texas or agreed by the parties. The parties agree to share equally the cost of the mediation process and venue cost.
