Comment. Concerning Clause 10.1: It is here specified what portion of the Leased Object the parties have as per contract signing assumed will be included in the lessor’s voluntary real estate lease registration in the Value Added Tax Register. In order for an area to be included in the lessor’s voluntary registration, such area must be used in one of the following ways:
Comment. [1] Paragraph (a) does not prohibit a lawyer or law firm* from paying a bonus to or otherwise compensating a nonlawyer employee from general revenues received for legal services, provided the arrangement does not interfere with the independent professional judgment of the lawyer or lawyers in the firm* and does not violate these rules or the State Bar Act. However, a nonlawyer employee’s bonus or other form of compensation may not be based on a percentage or share of fees in specific cases or legal matters. [2] Paragraph (a) also does not prohibit payment to a nonlawyer third-party for goods and services provided to a lawyer or law firm;* however, the compensation to a nonlawyer third- party may not be determined as a percentage or share of the lawyer’s or law firm’s overall revenues or tied to fees in particular cases or legal matters. A lawyer may pay to a nonlawyer third-party, such as a collection agency, a percentage of past due or delinquent fees in concluded matters that the third-party collects on the lawyer’s behalf.
Comment. EMORY shall provide COMPANY with copies of all filings and official correspondence pertaining to such Prosecution and Maintenance of the Licensed Patents so as to give COMPANY an opportunity to advise and cooperate with EMORY in such Prosecution and Maintenance. In the event EMORY desires to transfer the prosecution of any of the Licensed Patents to new patent counsel, COMPANY’s written consent shall be obtained, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed.
Comment. This is the first study (to our knowledge) that has sys- tematically evaluated agreement among ROP experts for plus disease diagnosis. Consistent and accurate detec- tion of plus disease has an increasingly critical role in the identification of treatment-requiring ROP. This is par- ticularly relevant because the multicenter ETROP trial recently determined that presence of plus disease is suf- Table. Absolute Agreement in Plus Disease Diagnosis Among 22 Experts Reviewing 34 Imagesa No. (%) 3-Level Categorization 2-Level Categorization by 22 Experts by 22 Experts Image Plus Pre-plus Neither Plus Not Plus 2 1 (5) 16 (76) 4 (19) 1 (5) 20 (95) 3 14 (70) 6 (30) 0 14 (70) 6 (30) 4 5 (24) 12 (57) 4 (19) 5 (24) 16 (76) 5 3 (14) 9 (43) 9 (43) 3 (14) 18 (86) 6 22 (100) 0 0 22 (100) 0 7 1 (5) 9 (41) 12 (55) 1 (5) 21 (96) 8 21 (96) 1 (5) 0 21 (96) 1 (5) 9 0 9 (43) 12 (57) 0 21 (100) 10 0 0 22 (100) 0 22 (100) 11 22 (100) 0 0 22 (100) 0 12 1 (5) 11 (50) 10 (46) 1 (5) 21 (96) 13 7 (32) 15 (68) 0 7 (32) 15 (68) 14 2 (10) 11 (52) 8 (38) 2 (10) 19 (90) 15 12 (60) 8 (40) 0 12 (60) 8 (40) 16 1 (5) 10 (48) 10 (48) 1 (5) 20 (95) 17 8 (38) 11 (52) 2 (10) 8 (38) 13 (62) 18 1 (5) 10 (46) 11 (50) 1 (5) 21 (96) 19 2 (10) 14 (67) 5 (24) 2 (10) 19 (90) 20 20 (95) 1 (5) 0 20 (95) 1 (5) 21 0 8 (38) 13 (62) 0 21 (100) 22 11 (52) 10 (48) 0 11 (52) 10 (48) 23 17 (77) 5 (23) 0 17 (77) 5 (23) 24 0 5 (23) 17 (77) 0 22 (100) 25 2 (10) 9 (43) 10 (48) 2 (10) 19 (90) 26 16 (73) 6 (27) 0 16 (73) 6 (27) 27 1 (5) 8 (36) 13 (59) 1 (5) 21 (96) 28 14 (64) 8 (36) 0 14 (64) 8 (36) 29 1 (5) 15 (71) 5 (24) 1 (5) 20 (95) 30 17 (81) 4 (19) 0 17 (81) 4 (19) 31 1 (5) 8 (36) 13 (59) 1 (5) 21 (96) 32 3 (14) 14 (64) 5 (23) 3 (14) 19 (86) 33 17 (77) 5 (23) 0 17 (77) 5 (23) 34 22 (100) 0 0 22 (100) 0 a Number of images in each row may not add to 22 because images categorized as cannot determine were excluded for that expert. ficient for meeting the definition of type 1 ROP, which benefits from early treatment regardless of the exact num- ber of clock hours of peripheral disease.4 The main finding from this study is that interexpert agreement of plus disease diagnosis is imperfect. Using a 3-level categorization, all 22 experts agreed on the same diagnosis in 4 of 34 images (12%) (Figure 2), and the mean weighted n statistic for each expert compared with all others ranged from 0.25 (fair agreement) to 0.55 (mod- erate agreement) (Figure 3). Using a 2-level categoriza- tion, all experts who provided a diagnosis agre...
Comment. [1] An agreement restricting the right of lawyers to practice after leaving a firm not only limits their professional autonomy but also limits the freedom of clients to choose a lawyer. Paragraph
Comment. The no-breach-or-default opinions given in paragraph three are discussed in Section 15 of the Accord and the related Commentary. This opinion is designed to be limited to breaches or defaults related to performance of the Agreement through the closing when the Opinion Letter is delivered. Some buyers may seek to broaden the opinion to include required post-closing performance, inwhich event the Opinion should cover ‘‘execution, delivery and performance ’’ The most troublesome aspect of these opinions is identification of the agreements and commitments described in paragraph 3(b) of the opinion. It is not unusual, at least in the case of opinions not covered by the Accord, for the buyer to request that the opinion cover ‘‘any agreement or commitment known to us to which Seller is a party or by which its property or assets is bound.’’ Use of ‘‘known to us’’ introduces the uncertainties inherent in a knowledge standard and may result in an overly broad reference. The Accord and the model form of Accord opinion take a different approach and favor identifying the agreements and commitments to which this opinion is to apply (e.g., a list of agreements, a schedule to the acquisition agreement or a list of exhibits to an SEC filing). The opining lawyer should then review the agreements and com- mitments listed and give the opinion based upon that review. It is inappropriate to define the selection criteria for this Opinion in terms of the ultimate conclusion to be reached by the opining lawyer (e.g., all agreements and commitments that prohibit a change of control of the seller). This approach of utilizing a specific list requires that the parties define the agreements or commitments in a way that satisfies the buyer’s legitimate interest in having company counsel review those agreements and commit- ments likely to present significant issues while simultaneously limiting the scope of that review to one that is feasible and does not involve disproportionate cost in the context of the transaction. Counsel should take care in agreeing to opine to a very detailed list of insignificant agreements; the failure to obtain a consent to one immaterial agreement does not create an unintended failure of a condition to closing. If consummation of the acqui- sition would result in a default under one of the agreements covered in paragraph 3(b) of the opinion letter, company counsel could not deliver the opinion letter in the form required. Although the default would also consti...
Comment. In opposing the proposed rule, one respondent also asserted that the use of lump-sum payments for travel and temporary lodging related relocation costs ‘‘is not a predominant industry practice at this time.’’ The respondent explained that it recently reviewed the current relocation policies in place at four large contractor locations and found that three of these four contractors use a single corporate- wide policy for their employee relocation reimbursement programs. Even though one of these three companies claims it is a predominantly commercial company and the other two companies also have a substantial commercial business base, the respondent pointed out that none of the three has established a lump-sum option for its commercial business segments. In addition, the respondent cited an August 2003 news release from a relocation management firm which stated that only 30 percent of the companies it had recently surveyed said they were using lump-sums to cover travel and temporary lodging expenses. Finally, the respondent pointed out that it had recently been advised by a relocation management firm that, shortly before Dr. Xxxx Xxxxx left the Department of Defense, he ‘‘shut down’’ an effort by the relocation management firm and the Defense Integrated Travel and Relocation Solutions (DITRS) office to put together a plan for using lump- sums for DoD civilian relocations. After reviewing the responses to the October 24, 2002, Federal Register Notice of Request for Comments (67 FR 65468), a respondent questioned ‘‘whether the FAR Council has obtained sufficient information to support its assertion that it is now common commercial practice to reimburse relocating employees on a lump-sum basis for their house-hunting, final move, and temporary lodging expenses.’’ The respondent observed that of the eight respondents who responded to that notice, one respondent’s letter gave no specifics on the number of companies using lump- sum reimbursements, and another respondent stated that its 2001 survey showed that 55 companies out of 109 contacted were using lump-sum reimbursements. In supporting the proposed rule, one respondent agreed ‘‘with the Councils’ statement that the use of lump-sum payments is a common commercial practice’’ and expressed the belief ‘‘that the proposed rule will help align relocation cost reimbursement policies with commercial best practices.’’ Another respondent also agreed that the proposed changes ‘‘are in keeping with current commercial bus...
Comment. This opinion is designed to be limited to consents related to performance of the agreement through the closing when the opinion letter is being delivered. Some buyers may seek to broaden the opinion to include required post-closing performance, in which event the opinion should cover ‘‘execution, delivery and performance of the Agreement.’’
Comment. In order for the employer not to be obliged to make a preliminary tax deduction and to pay an employer’s contribution based on the amount of the subsistence allowance, an exemption must be granted by the local tax authority. The amounts are shown in Appendix 2.
Comment. LICENSOR shall use reasonable efforts to provide COMPANY with copies of all filings and official correspondence pertaining to such Prosecution and Maintenance of the Licensed Patents at least thirty days prior to any deadline so as to give COMPANY an opportunity to advise and cooperate with LICENSOR in such Prosecution and Maintenance. In the event LICENSOR desires to transfer the prosecution of any of the Licensed Patents to new patent counsel, LICENSOR shall be responsible for costs associated with effecting the transfer and COMPANY’s written consent shall be obtained, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed.
