Potential Competition Review Sample Clauses

Potential Competition Review. 13.3.1 If the act of AbbVie proceeding with the In-Licensing requires the making of filings under the Xxxx-Xxxxx-Xxxxxx Antitrust Improvements Act (the “HSR Act”), or under any similar pre-merger or antitrust notification provision in the European Union or any other jurisdiction, or if AbbVie’s election not to proceed with the In-Licensing results in Ablynx being required to make any filings under the HSR Act or under any similar pre-merger or antitrust notification provision in the European Union or any other jurisdiction, then all rights and obligations related to AbbVie proceeding with the In-Licensing or AbbVie’s decision not to proceed with the In-Licensing will be tolled until the applicable waiting period has expired or been terminated or until approval or clearance from the reviewing authority has been received, and each Party agrees to diligently make any such filings and respond to any request for information to expedite review of such transaction and minimize or avoid any delays in payments. 13.3.2 If the antitrust enforcement authorities in the U.S. make a second request under the HSR Act, or any antitrust enforcement authority in another jurisdiction commences an investigation related to AbbVie proceeding with the In-Licensing or decision by AbbVie not to proceed with the In-Licensing, then the Parties will, in good faith, cooperate with each other and take reasonable actions to attempt to (i) resolve all enforcement agency concerns about the transaction under investigation, and (ii) diligently oppose any enforcement agency opposition to such transaction. If the enforcement agency files a formal action to oppose the transaction, the Parties will confer in good faith to determine the appropriate strategy for resolving the enforcement agency opposition, including, and where appropriate, the renegotiation of their obligations under this Agreement with respect to the In-Licensing, with the objective of placing each Party, to the maximum extent possible, in the same economic position that each Party would have occupied if AbbVie’s decision to proceed with the In-Licensing or not to proceed with the In-Licensing had been permitted. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this Section 13.3 will require either Party to divest, sell, license or otherwise dispose of any assets, entities or facilities.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Potential Competition Review 

Related to Potential Competition Review

  • Disciplinary Information There are no legal or disciplinary events to disclose in response to this item.

  • Transition Review Period In accordance with Article 35, Layoff and Recall, the Employer may require an employee to complete a transition review period.

  • Project Review A. Programmatic Allowances 1. If FEMA determines that the entire scope of an Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances in Appendix B of this Agreement, with determinations for Tier II Allowances being made by SOI-qualified staff, FEMA shall complete the Section 106 review process by documenting this determination in the project file, without SHPO review or notification. 2. If the Undertaking involves a National Historic Landmark (NHL), FEMA shall notify the SHPO, participating Tribe(s), and the NPS NHL Program Manager of the NPS Midwest Regional Office that the Undertaking conforms to one or more allowances. FEMA shall provide information about the proposed scope of work for the Undertaking and the allowance(s) enabling FEMA’s determination. 3. If FEMA determines any portion of an Undertaking’s scope of work does not conform to one or more allowances listed in Appendix B, FEMA shall conduct expedited or standard Section 106 review, as appropriate, for the entire Undertaking in accordance with Stipulation II.B, Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings, or Stipulation II.C, Standard Project Review. 4. Allowances may be revised and new allowances may be added to this Agreement in accordance with Stipulation IV.A.3, Amendments. B. Expedited Review for Emergency Undertakings

  • Supported Employment Reporting After the DORS consumer has completed the first month of Supported Employment job coaching and monthly thereafter, LOWER SHORE ENTERPRISES shall complete the Employment Service Progress Form (Attachment D). The Form is required each month whether LOWER SHORE ENTERPRISES is sending an invoice to DORS or not.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Exclusion Review Notwithstanding any provision of Title 42 of the United States Code or Title 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the only issues in a proceeding for exclusion based on a material breach of this CIA shall be whether Good Shepherd was in material breach of this CIA and, if so, whether: a. Good Shepherd cured such breach within 30 days of its receipt of the Notice of Material Breach; or b. the alleged material breach could not have been cured within the 30-day period, but that, during the 30-day period following Good Shepherd’s receipt of the Notice of Material Breach: (i) Good Shepherd had begun to take action to cure the material breach; (ii) Good Shepherd pursued such action with due diligence; and (iii) Good Shepherd provided to OIG a reasonable timetable for curing the material breach. For purposes of the exclusion herein, exclusion shall take effect only after an ALJ decision favorable to OIG, or, if the ALJ rules for Good Shepherd, only after a DAB decision in favor of OIG. Good Shepherd’s election of its contractual right to appeal to the DAB shall not abrogate OIG’s authority to exclude Good Shepherd upon the issuance of an ALJ’s decision in favor of OIG. If the ALJ sustains the determination of OIG and determines that exclusion is authorized, such exclusion shall take effect 20 days after the ALJ issues such a decision, notwithstanding that Good Shepherd may request review of the ALJ decision by the DAB. If the DAB finds in favor of OIG after an ALJ decision adverse to OIG, the exclusion shall take effect 20 days after the DAB decision. Good Shepherd shall waive its right to any notice of such an exclusion if a decision upholding the exclusion is rendered by the ALJ or DAB. If the DAB finds in favor of Good Shepherd, Good Shepherd shall be reinstated effective on the date of the original exclusion.

  • EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE REVIEW AND EMPLOYEE FILES 19.01 (a) When a formal assessment of an employee’s performance is made, the employee concerned must be given an opportunity to discuss and then sign the assessment form in question upon its completion to indicate that its contents have been read. A copy of the assessment form will be provided to the employee at that time. An employee’s signature on his or her assessment form will be considered to be an indication only that its contents have been read and shall not indicate the employee’s concurrence with the statements contained on the form.

  • EMPLOYEE WORK YEAR 9.1 The work year shall be as follows:

  • CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY INFORMATION The parties may provide technical information, documentation and expertise to each other that is either (1) marked as being confidential or, (2) if delivered in oral form is summarized in writing within 10 working days and identified as being confidential (“Confidential Information”). The receiving party shall for a period of five (5) years from the date of disclosure (i) hold the disclosing party’s Confidential Information in strict confidence, and (ii), except as previously authorized in writing by the disclosing party, not publish or disclose the disclosing party’s Confidential Information to anyone other than the receiving party’s employees on a need-to-know basis, and (iii) use the disclosing party’s Confidential Information solely for performance of this Contract. The foregoing requirement shall not apply to any portion of a party’s Confidential Information which (a) becomes publicly known through no wrongful act or omission on the part of the receiving party; (b) is already known to the receiving party at the time of the disclosure without similar nondisclosure obligations; (c) is rightfully received by the receiving party from a third party without similar nondisclosure obligations; (d) is approved for release by written authorization of the disclosing party; (e) is clearly demonstrated by the receiving party to have been independently developed by the receiving party without access to the disclosing party’s Confidential Information; or (f) is required to be disclosed by order of a court or governmental body or by applicable law, provided that the party intending to make such required disclosure shall promptly notify the other party of such intended disclosure in order to allow such party to seek a protective order or other remedy.

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