Extension to J > 2 and Related Cases Sample Clauses

Extension to J > 2 and Related Cases. The game naturally extends to more than two challengers where Γj is repeated for j ∈ {2, . . . , J} with the only difference being that the Πj payoffs j j will be based on oligopoly profits ΠN# rather than for instance by triopoly profits given by ΠT# . Appendix (A.3) provides an example of profits under a oligopoly with J + 1 firms along with the structure of Γj and where we maintain the assumption that if the brand reaches an agreement with all the challengers, then in the post patent period the order of entry is given by the order of challengers (i.e., first paid off firm gets the first mover advantage). J+1 s Observe that solving Γj, i.e., finding out whether Gj challenges B and computing Xj, requires the solution to the game Γj+1 first. Hence, SPE payoffs in Γj and all payments XJ, . . . , Xj are found by a recursive computation that uses equation (1) and Lemma (2) at each step J, . . . , x. For example, if this computation yields that the generics GJ, . . . , Gj challenge B and agree on the P4D payments XJ, . . . , Xj, then the brand’s expected SPE payoff in Γj is, j 0 u (Γ ) = u (Γ ) − ΣJ X , (6) s=j where u0(ΓJ+1) is the payoff to the brand B after the game ends with J P4D agreements. If all these P4D payments are positive, condition (2) for a fixed j will be eventually violated when the number of generics J is sufficiently large. In this case, B and Gj will go to court. On the other hand, a condition for a universal agreement on P4D deals is specified in the next proposition.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Extension to J > 2 and Related Cases. The game naturally extends to more than two challengers where Γj is repeated for j ∈ {2, . . . , J} with the only difference being that the Πj payoffs will be based on oligopoly profits ΠN# rather than for instance by triopoly profits given by ΠT# . Appendix C provides an example of profits under a oligopoly with J + 1 firms along with the structure of Γj and where we maintain the assumption that if the brand reaches an agreement with all the challengers, then in the post patent period the order of entry is given by the order of challengers (i.e., first paid off firm gets the first mover advantage). Appendix C also provides other important extensions. Notably changes in listed profits in Γj,G – the payoffs if j-th generic wins the 14An alternative is to be agnostic about the fee setting process and set the profits inclusive of the licensing fees to be V˜T 1 = ΠT 1 + ρΠT 1 (for the branded firm), V˜T 1 = (1 − ρ)ΠT 1 (for generic 1) and, V T 1 = ΠT 1 (for generic 2), where ρ ∈ (0, 1) is an exogenously set parameter based on the relative bargaining power. case – allows us to model (i) the FF system (exclusivity available to only the first generic), (ii) no exclusivity (if a generic wins, all challengers can enter immediately and there is no duopoly period),

Related to Extension to J > 2 and Related Cases

  • Submission to Jurisdiction; Waivers Each party hereto hereby irrevocably and unconditionally:

  • Governing Law: Submission to Jurisdiction, Etc This Agreement and any claim, controversy or dispute arising under or related to this Agreement, the relationship of the parties, and/or the interpretation and enforcement of the rights and duties of the parties shall be enforced, governed, and construed in all respects (whether in contract or in tort) in accordance with the federal law of the United States if and to the extent such law is applicable, and otherwise in accordance with the laws of the State of New York applicable to contracts made and to be performed entirely within such State. Each of the parties hereto agrees (a) to submit to the exclusive jurisdiction and venue of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and the United States Court of Federal Claims for any and all civil actions, suits or proceedings arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the Purchase contemplated hereby and (b) that notice may be served upon (i) the Company at the address and in the manner set forth for notices to the Company in Section 5.7 and (ii) Treasury at the address and in the manner set forth for notices to the Company in Section 5.7, but otherwise in accordance with federal law. TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO HEREBY UNCONDITIONALLY WAIVES TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY CIVIL LEGAL ACTION OR PROCEEDING RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR THE PURCHASE CONTEMPLATED HEREBY.

  • Submission to Jurisdiction Each party submits to the nonexclusive jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and of any New York State Court sitting in New York, New York for legal proceedings relating to this Agreement. Each party irrevocably waives, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any objection that it may now or in the future have to the venue of a proceeding brought in such a court and any claim that the proceeding was brought in an inconvenient forum.

  • Governing Law; Submission to Jurisdiction This Agreement and each Note shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of New York. The Borrower hereby submits to the nonexclusive jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and of any New York State court sitting in New York City for purposes of all legal proceedings arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the transactions contemplated hereby. The Borrower irrevocably waives, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any objection which it may now or hereafter have to the laying of the venue of any such proceeding brought in such a court and any claim that any such proceeding brought in such a court has been brought in an inconvenient forum.

  • Invoicing for Charges Against the Judicial Council’s Master Account A. The Contractor shall establish a Master Account for the Judicial Council’s charges provided for under the exhibits of this Agreement.

  • Program Requirements Provided At No Charge to the Judicial Council A. The Contractor shall provide the following items during the Program at no charge to the Judicial Council:

  • Governing Law; Submission to Jurisdiction; Waiver of Jury Trial THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, WITHOUT REFERENCE TO ITS CONFLICT OF LAW PROVISIONS, AND THE OBLIGATIONS, RIGHTS AND REMEDIES OF THE PARTIES HEREUNDER SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUCH LAWS. EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO HEREBY SUBMITS TO THE EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK AND OF ANY NEW YORK STATE COURT SITTING IN NEW YORK CITY FOR PURPOSES OF ALL LEGAL PROCEEDINGS ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY. EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO HEREBY FURTHER IRREVOCABLY WAIVES ANY CLAIM THAT ANY SUCH COURTS LACK JURISDICTION OVER SUCH PARTY, AND AGREES NOT TO PLEAD OR CLAIM, IN ANY LEGAL ACTION OR PROCEEDING WITH RESPECT TO THIS AGREEMENT IN ANY OF THE AFORESAID COURTS, THAT ANY SUCH COURT LACKS JURISDICTION OVER SUCH PARTY. EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO IRREVOCABLY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, ANY OBJECTION THAT IT MAY NOW OR HEREAFTER HAVE TO THE LAYING OF THE VENUE OF ANY SUCH PROCEEDING BROUGHT IN SUCH A COURT AND ANY CLAIM THAT ANY SUCH PROCEEDING BROUGHT IN SUCH A COURT HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN AN INCONVENIENT FORUM. EACH PARTY HERETO HEREBY WAIVES, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ANY RIGHT IT MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN RESPECT OF ANY LITIGATION DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ARISING OUT OF, UNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT.

  • XXXXX-XXXXX AND RELATED ACT PROVISIONS This section is applicable to all Federal-aid construction projects exceeding $2,000 and to all related subcontracts and lower-tier subcontracts (regardless of subcontract size). The requirements apply to all projects located within the right-of- way of a roadway that is functionally classified as Federal-aid highway. This excludes roadways functionally classified as local roads or rural minor collectors, which are exempt. Contracting agencies may elect to apply these requirements to other projects. The following provisions are from the U.S. Department of Labor regulations in 29 CFR 5.5 “Contract provisions and related matters” with minor revisions to conform to the FHWA- 1273 format and FHWA program requirements.

  • Certification of Funds; Budget and Fiscal Provisions; Termination in the Event of Non-Appropriation This Agreement is subject to the budget and fiscal provisions of the City’s Charter. Charges will accrue only after prior written authorization certified by the Controller, and the amount of City’s obligation hereunder shall not at any time exceed the amount certified for the purpose and period stated in such advance authorization. This Agreement will terminate without penalty, liability or expense of any kind to City at the end of any fiscal year if funds are not appropriated for the next succeeding fiscal year. If funds are appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year, this Agreement will terminate, without penalty, liability or expense of any kind at the end of the term for which funds are appropriated. City has no obligation to make appropriations for this Agreement in lieu of appropriations for new or other agreements. City budget decisions are subject to the discretion of the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors. Contractor’s assumption of risk of possible non-appropriation is part of the consideration for this Agreement. THIS SECTION CONTROLS AGAINST ANY AND ALL OTHER PROVISIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT.

  • Waiver of Appellate and Post-Conviction Rights a. The defendant acknowledges, understands and agrees that by pleading guilty pursuant to this plea agreement he waives his right to appeal or collaterally attack a finding of guilt following the acceptance of this plea agreement, except on grounds of (1) ineffective assistance of counsel; or (2) prosecutorial misconduct.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.