Hypothetical Sample Clauses

Hypothetical. Assume that MirnaRx grants a sublicense to a Sublicensee to develop and commercialize its Licensed Product “[***]” when such product has [***] but before [***]. Assume further that under such sublicense agreement, the Sublicensee pays MirnaRx an upfront sublicense fee of $[***], pays no milestone payment on [***], and pays MirnaRx the following milestone payments with respect to such sublicense grant on achieving the listed milestone events: (a) $[***] on [***], $[***] on [***], and $[***] on [***]. Based on the foregoing assumptions (and understanding that this is just a hypothetical example and provides no precedence or assumption of the terms of an actual sublicense deal), MirnaRx would pay to Marina Bio Sublicense Fees in the following amounts and times under such hypothetical: · Sublicense Fee of $[***], by the date [***] after the upfront sublicense fee is paid ([***]% of the upfront) · Sublicense Fee of $[***], by the date [***] after the [***] milestone for [***] is achieved by Sublicensee (the “True-Up Payment” of $[***] equal to the difference between the “[***]” milestone payment amount under Section 5.3(a)(i)(2) and the “Cumulative Sublicense Fees” paid to Marina Bio up to that point for such product) · Sublicense Fee of $[***], by the date [***] after [***] (equal to [***]% of the milestone payment made by the Sublicensee, plus a “True-up Payment” of $[***], such that the Cumulative Sublicensee Fees as of such date (such cumulative amount equal to $[***] after such True-Up Payment) equals the Milestone Payment Sum as of such date (which is $[***], including the milestone payment amount under Section 5.3(a)(i)(3) for achieving a [***] milestone) · Sublicense Fee of $[***] by the date [***] after [***] ([***]% of the milestone payment paid by Sublicensee to MirnaRx for [***]) · Sublicense Fee of $[***], by the date [***] after [***] (equal to [***]% of the milestone payment by the Sublicensee, plus a “True-up Payment” of $[***], such that the Cumulative Sublicensee Fees as of such date (such cumulative amount equal to $[***] after such True-Up Payment) equals the Milestone Payment Sum as of such date (which is $[***], including the milestone payment amount under Section 5:3(a)(i)(4) for [***]) [***] Certain information in this document has been omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Confidential treatment has been requested with respect to the omitted portions. JOINT PRESS RELEASE Marina Biotech and Mirna Thera...
Hypothetical. Starting Value of 100 used in these examples has been chosen for illustrative purposes only. The actual Starting Value is 4,072.43, which was the closing level of the Market Measure on the pricing date.
Hypothetical. Vice President X makes a salary of $210,000 and has, under the annual cash incentive plan, a 40% target ($84,000) if Cray makes $30 million of adjusted pre-award operating income (for 50% of his total award) and X meets five defined individual goals (10% each or 50% together of his total award). (X’s target award for the prior year was 35%, or $73,500, with the prior year’s plan structured similarly to the current year’s plan.) If Cray’s adjusted pre-award operating income is $20 million, the plan award is 50% of target; if it is $26 million, the plan award is 75% of target; and if it is $34 million, it is 125% of target. Cray must be profitable for any payment to be made under the cash incentive plan, and a condition to payment is that the officer must be an employee on the date of payment. X has been a Vice President for 30 months and does not accrue any vacation. X has 16,000 options for Cray common stock, of which 4,000 options are vested, and 5,000 shares of restricted stock, of which 2,500 shares are vested.
Hypothetical. 1 • The only Extraordinary Cash Dividend during the Measurement Period with a record date before the end of the Performance Period commencing on October 1, 2016 was $3.00 per share. • Prior to the Performance Period commencing on October 1, 2016, no portion of the Performance Requirements have been satisfied. • With respect to the Performance Period commencing on October 1, 2016, (i) the average Daily Value equals $30.33, (ii) the Daily Value for 30 of such trading days was $33.00, the Daily Value for another 30 of such trading days was $28.00 and the Daily Value for another 30 of such trading days was $30.00 and (iii) the lowest Daily Value during the last 20 trading days was $33.00. The Daily Value on the last day of such Performance Period was $33.00. • Based on the foregoing, the Reference Price for such Performance Period is $30.00 (which is the highest number that does not exceed the amount determined under any of clause (i) ($30.33), clause (ii) ($30.00) or clause (iii) ($33.00)). Because $30.00 is greater than the Reference Price Minimum Hurdle (which as of the end of such Performance Period was $27.76), the Performance Requirements for the Performance Period commencing on October 1, 2016 were satisfied for $9,517,291.07 (which equals $7,500,000 + ($12,500,000 X (($30.00 - $27.76) / ($41.64 -$27.76))). • Based on such achievement, the number of PSUs that will be treated as Performance Satisfied PSUs would equal 288,402.76 ($9,517,291.07 / $33.00). Such Performance Satisfied PSUs would then be immediately converted to their Settlement Amount, which equals $9,517,291.07 (the sum of the Fair Market Value of such Performance Satisfied PSUs on the last day of such Performance Period ($8,652,082.79), plus the Accumulated Dividend Equivalent Value of such Performance Satisfied PSUs ($865,208.28)). • Such amount ($9,517,291.07) would then be paid as provided in Section 6 only upon the satisfaction of the Time-Based Requirements.
Hypothetical. Starting Value of 100 used in these examples has been chosen for illustrative purposes only, and does not represent a likely actual Starting Value for the Market Measure. Leveraged Index Return Notes® TS-4 Redemption Amount Calculation Examples Example 1The Ending Value is 70.00, or 70.00% of the Starting Value: Starting Value: 100.00Threshold Value:80.00Ending Value: 70.00 Redemption Amount per unit Example 2The Ending Value is 90.00, or 90.00% of the Starting Value: Starting Value: 100.00Threshold Value:80.00Ending Value: 90.00Redemption Amount (per unit) = $10.00, the principal amount, since the Ending Value is less than the Starting Value but equal to or greater than the Threshold Value. Example 3The Ending Value is 110.00, or 110.00% of the Starting Value: Starting Value: 100.00Ending Value: 110.00 = $11.40 Redemption Amount per unit Leveraged Index Return Notes® TS-5Risk FactorsThere are important differences between the notes and a conventional debt security. An investment in the notes involves significant risks, including those listed below. You should carefully review the more detailed explanation of risks relating to the notes in the “Risk Factorssections beginning on page PS-7 of product supplement EQUITY LIRN-1, page S-2 of the prospectus supplement, and page 7 of the prospectus identified above. We also urge you to consult your investment, legal, tax, accounting, and other advisors before you invest in the notes.Structure-Related Risks? Depending on the performance of the Index as measured shortly before the maturity date, your investment may result in a loss; there is no guaranteed return of principal.? Your return on the notes may be less than the yield you could earn by owning a conventional fixed or floating rate debt security of comparable maturity.? Your investment return may be less than a comparable investment directly in the stocks included in the Index.Valuation- and Market-Related Risks? Our initial estimated value of the notes will be lower than the public offering price of the notes. Our initial estimated value of the notes is only an estimate. The public offering price of the notes will exceed our initial estimated value because it includes costs associated with selling and structuring the notes, as well as hedging our obligations under the notes with a third party, which may include BofAS or one of its affiliates. These costs include the underwriting discount and an expected hedging related charge, as further described in “Str...
Hypothetical. 2 • The facts are the same as Hypothetical 1. • Prior to the end of the Performance Period commencing on March 1, 2017, no additional portion of the Performance Requirements have been satisfied (beyond those satisfied under Hypothetical 1 above), nor have any additional Extraordinary Cash Dividends been declared. • With respect to the Performance Period commencing on March 1, 2017, the Reference Price is determined to be $29.85 applying the same principles as applied in Hypothetical 1. • Based on the foregoing, the Reference Price for such Performance Period did 12176264.1.TAX not exceed the Reference Price Minimum Hurdle (which at such time was $30.00), and as such, no portion of the Performance Requirements was satisfied during such Performance Period. However, the Performance Requirements for the previous Performance Period (commencing on October 1, 2016) remain satisfied, resulting in an Aggregate Settlement Amount of $9,517,291.07 (to be paid if and only if the Time-Based Requirements are satisfied).
Hypothetical no connected speech)SCOPE SCOPE first rules out (35a–c), leaving just the bottom two candidates in the running. The surviving candidates, (35d–e), then fare equally with respect to the SUFFIX constraint, with one violation each. I assume that some other constraint—ranked either above or below SUFFIX—rules out (35d). Alternatively, if the clitic’s failure to attach to any preceding 42 Billings and Rudin (1996: 38–39, 50) discuss a non-clitic phenomenon in Bulgarian which shows how a language can have speakers who acquire one of two rankings. Faced, as adults, with data that would tease apart the ranking of the two constraints, speakers vary in their judgments, presumably based on the random ordering learned as children. PrWd prevents (35d) from exiting Gen, then (35e) would still be the optimal form.43 Such a language would have an invariably clause-ini- tial clitic which is suffixed to the preceding, extra-clausal PrWd if there is an available preceding prosodic host, as in Tagalog and Warlpiri, but prefixed to the first PrWd of its clause if there is not an available preceding PrWd. This clitic, because it does not change position, just its prosodic affiliation, would not be considered a special clitic under Zwicky’s (1977) classification. Possibly for this reason, linguists in the past quarter century or so may have overlooked such a clitic.44 Moreover, most linguists—both philologists, who have few prosodic cues in their textual evidence, and syntacticians alike—have been intrigued by clitics because of their unique positioning. A clitic with no positional variation would get little attention.The remaining two rankings, in (34e–f)—dubbed Strategy C in this studyresult in an order that, while theoretically possible, is unlikely from an acquisition standpoint. Much like the rankings in (34a–b), those in (34e–f) predict the same optimal candidate. Tableau (36) hap- pens to list the constraints as in (34f). However, if the ranking in (34e) were used (not shown here), the same polarity and constituent order would result.
Hypothetical. Homer and Marge, a married couple, have two children. After the relevant deductions are taken, Homer earns $40,000/year; and Marge earns $20,000/year. If they divorce and Marge gets custody of the children, how much child support should Homer pay Marge? _25%
Hypothetical. A talented young scientist takes a full-time position as an assistant pharmacology professor on the tenure track at a major research university. At the beginning of her sixth year, the faculty member will be expected to document her accomplishments, and these are reviewed by faculty at other institutions and at various levels within the university. The review will use the three criteria of research, teaching, and service, with the most important criterion being research.In her first year on the faculty, while alone in her office working late one evening, an older, tenured male colleague stops by to chat. During this conversation, he suggests they go out for a drink. He makes a point to explain that his wife is out of town. She is uncomfortable, anxious, and not sure how to respond. He is a potential resource for her scholarship and professional advancement, as they work in closely related fields in pharmacology, and he will ultimately vote on her tenure. The combination of his welcome professional support and unwelcome romantic attention presents the group-based discrimination claims). In a similar vein, some legal scholars have explored procedural approaches to addressing discrimination, such as requiring employers to establish meaningful procedures for responding to requests for flexible work schedules or requiring pay transparency in an effort to improve the ability of employees to negotiate for fair pay. See Rachel Arnow-Richman, Public Law and Private Process: Toward an Incentivized Organizational Justice Model of Equal Employment Quality for Caregivers, 2007 UTAH L. REV. 25, 26-27; Gowri Ramachandran, Pay Transparency, 116 PENN. ST. L. REV. 1043, 1043 (2012). unsettling possibility that objecting to the latter may cost her the former.67 She smiles and explains that her husband is keeping dinner warm and politely declines. He leaves, and she packs up her bag and immediately goes home, resolving not to work late alone in her office anymore. After this incident, the untenured professor tries to avoid this colleague whenever possible. She is mostly successful in this effort, except for the weekly faculty scholarship lunch, when, on more than one occasion, he stands behind her in the buffet line and places both hands on her shoulders. She does not share these incidents with anyone at work. Although extremely unsettling, she does not believe they are serious enough to report, and she also wonders if perhaps she sent the wrong signals in the beginning by be...
Hypothetical. Jan. 1 Jan. 31 March 10 March 15 Events 2014 Executive’s employment contract expires at midnight on the evening of Jan 1. Deadline for Board to determine, if at all, what amount of 2013 LTI award that Exec. has earned and what percent of award will be made in equity and what percent in cash. Exec. receives: (a) second 1/3 of the amount of the LTI award, if any, that the Board determined he earned for 2012, and (b) 1/3 of the amount of the LTI award that the Board determines he earned for 2013, if any. Exhibit 4