Finalization Sample Clauses
The Finalization clause establishes the point at which an agreement or transaction becomes complete and legally binding. Typically, it outlines the steps or conditions that must be fulfilled for finalization, such as the exchange of signatures, delivery of goods, or completion of required approvals. This clause ensures that all parties are clear about when their obligations are set and the contract is enforceable, thereby preventing disputes over whether or when the agreement has taken effect.
Finalization. In most cases, adoptive parents are eligible to finalize the adoption in Utah under Utah law if adoptive parents are resident of Utah, the child was born in Utah, or one of the birth parents resides in Utah when the adoption petition is filed. Finalizing the adoption in Utah typically saves adoptive families in legal expenses and provides for a more secure adoption. It also enables a representative from A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC to attend the finalization hearing to consent to the adoption and to address any issues that the court may have. For these reasons, adoptive families are required to finalize the adoption in Utah. In rare cases, where finalizing the adoption is not legally possible, adoptive families will need to obtain express written permission from A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC before commencing proceedings to adopt the child in another state. Following the receipt of reports of sufficient positive post placement visits that show the child is thriving in its home environment and bonding to the family, and upon completion of all of the adoptive families’ obligations as set forth under this and other agreements between A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC and the adoptive family, A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC will give approval for the adoptive family to finalize the adoption. A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC representative will attend the adoption finalization hearing before a Utah court to provide necessary agency documentation as well as family support for those adoptions finalized in the State of Utah and for which post-placement evaluations are done by the A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC staff. In rare circumstances, where the adoptive family is unable to finalize the adoption before a Utah court and A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC grants permission for the adoptive family to finalize the adoption in another state, A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC will provide the adoptive family’s attorney with a written consent to the adoption and supporting documents instead of appearing at the finalization hearing, upon A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC’s approval for finalization pursuant to the conditions set forth above. Regardless of the state where the adoption is finalized, adoptive family agrees that Utah law shall apply to this Agreement and the fees charged by A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC , and hereby waives any claim against A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC, including any claim for reimbursement of fees brought in the court of another jurisdi...
Finalization. A completed agreement and required checks may be delivered to Crest Management Company during the office Hours of 8:30AM to 5:00PM Monday through Friday. The office is closed from Noon to 1:00 PM on Friday.
Finalization. Fifty percent (50%) of each evaluation being based upon teacher performance and fifty percent (50%) on student growth as set forth herein;
Finalization. (1) State Fund will review and evaluate claims for settlement, complete a "Proposed Finalization for State Cases" form, and submit the form to the RTWC with supporting documentation as requested by the Department. State Fund shall not enter into a Stipulation with Request for Award (Stip) or Compromise and Release (C&R) on a claim without obtaining prior approval from the RTWC or other appropriate Department Representative, unless the settlement falls within pre- authorized settlement authority established pursuant to Sections E(3) through E(5) below. If the settlement falls within Sections E(4) through E(5), State Fund will not be required to submit a "Proposed Finalization for State Cases" form with supporting documentation unless the pre-authorization for settlement authority contains this requirement.
(2) Departments will provide an appropriate reply in writing to State Fund's request for authority. If authority is not granted, the Department must include an explanation as to why.
(3) If authority is not granted, the RTWC or another Department Representative who has the authority to authorize settlement must personally appear at the MSC or Trial. Failure to appear shall constitute authorization to stipulate to the Disability Evaluation Unit (DEU) rating.
(4) Individual Departments may establish pre-approved settlement authority for State Fund by mutual agreement on specific parameters with State Fund. Any such agreements must be made in writing and a copy sent to CalHR prior to taking effect. While this settlement authority does not require written approval by CalHR pursuant to Section 5.3(A), CalHR may terminate or amend any such agreement at any time if CalHR determines that such agreement is not in the best interest of the State.
(5) CalHR may elect to establish pre-approved settlement authority for State Fund by mutual agreement with State Fund on specific parameters, on behalf of itself and the Departments, by providing the specific parameters to State Fund in writing.
Finalization. The parties agree that the precise language of the escrow instructions and choice of an escrow holder for deposit of the source code and other materials shall be finalized not later than sixty (60) days following the effective date hereof.
Finalization. A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC representative will attend the adoption finalization hearing in court to provide necessary agency documentation as well as family support for those adoptions finalized in the State of Utah and for which post-placement evaluations are done by the A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC staff. Out of state adoptive families may finalize the adoption in the Utah court district where the child was born, or where the agency is located, or in their state of residence. If the finalization is performed in a state other than Utah, A Guardian Angel Adoptions, LLC will provide a Consent of Adoption to the attorney of the adoptive family’s choice following the receipt of three post placement visits that show the child is thriving in its home environment and bonding to the family.
Finalization. 4 (1) Final documentation will be produced on acid-free, 100-year 5 archival paper, with the photographs and drawings on archival CDs.
6 (2) Demolition of the Clinton Railroad Bridge will not begin until the 7 final photo documentation is delivered to and received by the USCG and 8 both SHPOs as specified in II.A.2.d(2).
9 (3) Demolition of the C&NW Depot will not begin until the final 10 photo documentation is delivered to and received by the USCG and Iowa
Finalization. Since this protocol supports immediate closure, a valid finalization message from a single party is sufficient to insti- gate contract closure. The MPC protocol is executed between the parties during the computation phase and it concludes with a final output y that is accessible to all the parties. Therefore, we now define the algorithm, namely U.Finalize, that processes this y and produces a finalize message to be sent to the blockchain along with extracting all output coins coinj1, . . . , coinjn. • U.Finalize(id, y): ∈ – Assert (id, f, P ) Identifiers – Assert (id, $val, r, in, {(c(k,0), c(k,1), s(k,0), s(k,1))}0≤k<A) ∈ SecretElems – Fetch (id, Pi, coini, {C(k)}0≤k<A) from B.FreezeRecords for each Pi ∈ P (recall we assume that |P | = n) simulate a transcript that is computationally indistinguishable to any PPT distinguisher from the transcript produced in the real world execution of π. To correctly make use of A A D in the simulation, we must correctly simulate ’s view which requires us to simulate the honest parties, the blockchain and F M . The simulator is permitted access to an ideal functionality that computes the smart contract function. Note that the current version of our protocol, for simplicity, does not provide verification for the smart contract output string out nor does our correctness condition check its veracity. We note that it – Parse y as (((c(k)) , . . . , (c(k)) ), π, out) For all j ∈ [n]: 0≤k<A n 0≤k<A is straightforward to modify the protocol such that the output string is included in the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ proof such that the resulting
1) For all k ∈ {0, . . . , A − 1}:
a) Assert c(k) ∈ C(k) proof serves to encompass a “vote” amongst all participants of the correctness of out since the MPC program is assumed Q← ∈
2) coinjj ← Q 0≤k<A (c(k))2k to be correct. – ▇ ▇ [n] coinjj /coinj – ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.Verify((c, h), π) – Let ij be the index of this party – For k ∈ {0, . . . , A − 1}: it it
1) If c(k) = c(k,0): ∗ vk ← 0 Else: ∗ k ←
v 1 $valj ← Σ0≤k<A vk · 2k ti
Finalization. During the finalization phase each participant first determines the set of partic- ipants that successfully shared their secret key. A participant is only part of this set if it registered and shared its key successfully and there were no successful disputes filed against the participant. After this set is established, each partici- pant can compute its (individual) group secret key by computing the sum of the received shares. Furthermore the master public key can be computed by adding all public keys. As soon as any of the participants uploads this master public key, and the smart contract verifies its correctness, threshold signatures under this public key can be verified by the smart contract. To show the viability of our protocol we deployed our DKG contract in the Ethereum test network Ropsten and simulated a simple scenario with 5 participants running the client software. Clients A, B and C follow the prescribed protocol, while client D aborts after the registration phase and client E actively tries to manipulate the protocol run by providing an in- valid share. The contract can be found using an Ethereum block explorer such as ▇▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇/ by supplying the contract address 0x64eB9cbc8AAc7723A7A94b178b7Ac4c18D7E6269. This exemplary protocol ex- ecution is further documented in the Github repository ▇▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇/ PhilippSchindler/ethdkg/evaluation/. To highlight the scalability of our approach, we provide gas usage measure- ments for all types of transactions a client (potentially) needs to execute during a protocol run. We tested our implementation with up to 256 nodes and ob- serve that the consumed gas for all transactions is well below the current block gas limit of 8M . Deployment of a contract instance consumed 3.5M gas. The most expensive operation, i.e. filing a dispute, only has to be executed if an adversary actively tries to manipulate the protocol run. As in this case the adver- sarial behavior can be cryptographically proven to the smart contract, a security deposit could be used to refund the costs for a rightful dispute claim. Using the suggested gas price estimate of 2.5 Gwei from ▇▇▇▇▇://▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇.▇▇▇▇/, the cost of submitting a dispute in a scenario with 256 nodes is only ∼ 0.018 ETH (∼ $1.50).
Finalization. The master public key is constructed, uploaded and verified. In the following, we discuss each of the protocol phases in more detail.