Opinions of Counsel Receipt by the Administrative Agent of favorable opinions of legal counsel to the Loan Parties, addressed to the Administrative Agent and each Lender, dated as of the Closing Date, and in form and substance satisfactory to the Administrative Agent.
Advice of Counsel If PFPC shall be in doubt as to any question of law pertaining to any action it should or should not take, PFPC may request advice at its own cost from such counsel of its own choosing (who may be counsel for the Fund, the Fund's investment adviser or PFPC, at the option of PFPC).
Reliance; Advice of Counsel (a) The Owner Trustee shall incur no liability to anyone in acting upon any signature, instrument, notice, resolution, request, consent, order, certificate, report, opinion, bond or other document or paper believed by it to be genuine and believed by it to be signed by the proper party or parties. The Owner Trustee may accept a certified copy of a resolution of the board of directors or other governing body of any corporate party as conclusive evidence that such resolution has been duly adopted by such body and that the same is in full force and effect. As to any fact or matter the method of the determination of which is not specifically prescribed herein, the Owner Trustee may for all purposes hereof rely on a certificate, signed by the president or any vice president or by the treasurer, secretary or other authorized officers of the relevant party, as to such fact or matter, and such certificate shall constitute full protection to the Owner Trustee for any action taken or omitted to be taken by it in good faith in reliance thereon.
Opinions of Cost Because the Consultant does not control the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, methods of determining prices, or competitive bidding or market conditions, any opinions rendered as to costs, including but not limited to the costs of construction and materials, are made solely based on its judgment as a professional familiar with the industry. The Consultant cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual costs will not vary from its opinions of cost. If the Client wishes greater assurance as to the amount of any cost, it shall employ an independent cost estimator. Consultant's services required to bring costs within any limitation established by the Client will be paid for as Additional Services.
Opinion of Counsel The Indenture Trustee shall receive at least seven days prior written notice when requested by the Issuer to take any action pursuant to Section 8.04(b), accompanied by copies of any instruments involved, and the Indenture Trustee shall also require, as a condition to such action, an Opinion of Counsel, in form and substance satisfactory to the Indenture Trustee, stating the legal effect of any such action, outlining the steps required to complete the same, and concluding that all conditions precedent to the taking of such action have been complied with and such action will not materially and adversely impair the security for the Notes or the rights of the Noteholders in contravention of the provisions of this Indenture; provided, however, that such Opinion of Counsel shall not be required to express an opinion as to the fair value of the Trust Estate. Counsel rendering any such opinion may rely, without independent investigation, on the accuracy and validity of any certificate or other instrument delivered to the Indenture Trustee in connection with any such action.
FACSIMILE SUBMISSIONS Unless specifically prohibited by the terms of the Bid Specifications, facsimile Bids may be SUBMITTED AT THE SOLE OPTION AND RISK OF THE BIDDER. Only the FAX number(s) indicated in the Bid Specifications may be used. Access to the facsimile machine(s) is on a “first come, first serve” basis, and the Commissioner bears no liability or responsibility and makes no guarantee whatsoever with respect to the Bidder’s access to such equipment at any specific time. Bidders are solely responsible for submission and receipt of the entire facsimile Bid by the Authorized User prior to Bid opening and must include on the first page of the transmission the total number of pages transmitted in the facsimile, including the cover page. Incomplete, ambiguous or unreadable transmissions in whole or in part may be rejected at the sole discretion of the Commissioner. Facsimile Bids are fully governed by all conditions outlined in the Bid Documents and must be submitted on forms or in the format required in the Bid Specifications, including the executed signature page and acknowledgment.
Submissions on Behalf of Others Should You wish to submit work that is not Your original creation, You may submit it to OIDF separately from any Contribution, identifying the complete details of its source and of any license or other restriction (including, but not limited to, related patents, trademarks, and license agreements) of which you are personally aware, and conspicuously marking the work as "Submitted on behalf of a third-party: [named here]".
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 4 1. The conduct described in the Findings of Fact constitute grounds for disciplinary 5 action pursuant to A.R.S. §§ 32-3552(A)(1) and (3) and violate the provisions of A.R.S. § 32- 6 3501(9)(i) which states, “Any conduct or practice which is contrary to recognized standards of 7 ethics of the respiratory therapy profession or any conduct or practice which does or might 8 constitute a danger to the health, welfare or safety of the patient or the public.”
PRINTING OF AGREEMENTS 35.1 The Company will undertake the responsibility for the printing of the collective agreements as may be required from time to time and will absorb the cost of such printing. This will include the cost of printing updated pages.
Conclusions and Recommendations The demonstration and evaluation process provided an opportunity to test community specific tools with a range of end users from the memory institution domain and to gain greater insight into both the current and future evolution of the SHAMAN prototypes for preservation, access and re-use. Xxxx et al. (2000) in their user evaluation study of the Alexandria Digital Library which incorporated the evaluation of a Web prototype by earth scientists, information specialists and educators raised four key questions in relation to their findings that SHAMAN may be well advised to consider, they are paraphrased here with our conclusions from the investigations. What have we learned about our target organizations and potential users? Memory institutions are most definitely not a homogenised group; their needs and requirements differ greatly across the domain. Representatives of the archives community are agreed on the benefits of SHAMAN‟s authenticity validation function. The representatives of government information services remained unconvinced as to the need or benefit of grid technologies or distributed ingest while librarians saw the value of grid access as an asset of the framework. What have we learned about the evaluation approach for digital preservation? Within the limits of the exercise, in terms of time-frame and resources, the approach adopted has generated useful information for the further development of demonstrators and for the development of the SHAMAN framework overall. What have we learned about the SHAMAN ISP1 demonstrator? Respondents to the evaluation questionnaires and the focus groups indicate that, overall, the presentation of the demonstrator worked effectively and that, in general, participants in the demonstration and evaluation events were able to understand the intentions of the demonstration and to apply the ideas presented to their own context. What have we learned about the applicability of the SHAMAN framework to memory institutions? Respondents to the questionnaires and participants in the focus groups readily identified the value of the SHAMAN framework to their own operations. The majority had not yet established a long-term digital preservation policy, but recognized the need. Generally, the concepts of distributed ingest and grid operations found favour. Virtually all practitioners in the focus groups, however, drew attention to need of a lower level demonstration that would be closer to their everyday preservation troubles, especially for digital preservation to be applied to non-textual materials, such as film, photographs and sound archives. In addition to the criteria suggested by Xxxx et al., we can add a further project-related question: What have we learned that has implications for the training and dissemination phase of the Project? It was not part of the remit of the demonstration and evaluation specifically to discover information of relevance to the training and dissemination function. However, a number of factors will affect the efficacy of any training programme in particular. o First, no common understanding of digital preservation can be assumed of the potential target audiences for training. Consequently, it is likely that self-paced learning materials will be most effective in presenting the SHAMAN framework. o Secondly, the aims of SHAMAN as a project must be conveyed clearly: specifically, that it is a kind of „proof-of-concept‟ project and is not intended to deliver a package of programs capable of being implemented by institutions. o Thirdly, it needs to be emphasised that the SHAMAN framework is not limited to text documents; it can be applied to materials of all kinds. However, the demonstrations relate to bodies of material that were actually available for use. o Fourthly, the existing presentation materials are capable of being adapted for use in training activities. o Finally, the target audiences will appreciate the possibility of online access to the demonstrator, which will need to have very great ease of access in order that people with diverse backgrounds are able to use it with equal facility. We believe that, overall, WP14 has met its aims and objectives in this demonstration and evaluation of ISP1. Valuable lessons have been learnt by all parties involved, which will be transferred to the evaluation of ISP2 in the coming months.
