Pursuant to Paragraph 3 Clause Samples

The phrase "Pursuant to Paragraph 3" is used to reference and incorporate the terms, conditions, or requirements outlined in Paragraph 3 of a contract or agreement. In practice, this clause directs the reader or parties to follow the specific provisions or procedures detailed in that particular section, such as payment terms, obligations, or rights. Its core function is to ensure clarity and precision by explicitly linking actions or responsibilities to a previously defined part of the document, thereby reducing ambiguity and potential disputes over interpretation.
Pursuant to Paragraph 3. 1, (1) either the Independent Fiduciary does not approve the release or the Settlement Agreement, or disapproves the release or the Settlement Agreement for any reason whatsoever, or McKinsey reasonably concludes that the Independent Fiduciary’s approval does not include the determinations required by PTE 2003-39; and (2) the Settling Parties do not mutually agree to modify the terms of this Settlement Agreement to facilitate an approval by the Independent Fiduciary or the Independent Fiduciary’s determinations required by PTE 2003-39;
View SourceView Similar (10)
Pursuant to Paragraph 3. 01 of the Purchase Agreement, Lessee hereby notifies Lessor that Lessee is electing to exercise the Marketing Option on the Scheduled Expiration Date of the Facility 2 Lease Agreement of [_____, ____].
View SourceView Similar (8)
Pursuant to Paragraph 3. 1, (1) either the Independent Fiduciary does not approve the release or the Settlement Agreement, or disapproves the release or the Settlement Agreement for any reason whatsoever, or M&T Bank reasonably concludes that the Independent Fiduciary’s approval does not include the determinations required
View SourceView Similar (3)
Pursuant to Paragraph 3. 1, (1) either the Independent Fiduciary does not approve the Settlement Agreement, or disapproves the Settlement Agreement for any reason whatsoever or the Plan Fiduciary reasonably concludes that the Independent Fiduciary’s approval does not include the determinations required by the PTE; and (2) the Settling Parties do not mutually agree to modify the terms of this Settlement Agreement to facilitate an approval by the Independent Fiduciary or the Independent Fiduciary’s determinations required by the PTE.
View SourceView Similar (2)
Pursuant to Paragraph 3. 13.a.4, attached is a revised Attachment A reflecting the new time rates as of July 1, 1999 for the designated classifications.
View Source
Pursuant to Paragraph 3. 13.b of the Engineering Service Contract, the Guaranteed Maximum Fee is automatically amended to add additional sites. The Guaranteed Maximum Fee is amended upward on a per site fee. The per site fee is the amount of the Guaranteed Maximum Fee of the original scope divided by the number of sites in the original scope. The per site fee is $24,442 calculated using the original Guaranteed Maximum Fee of $5,304,000 and 217 sites as noted in Paragraph 2.01 of the Engineering Service Contract. The addition of sites is as follows: MARKET ORIGINAL SITES CURRENT SITES CHANGE IN SITES Phase I Albuquerque/Santa Fe 47 67 20 El Paso/Las Cruces 43 38 (5) Laredo 13 20 7 Phase 2A Lubbock 21 26 5 Amarillo 14 21 7 Midland/Odessa 18 15 (3) Phase 2B Abilene/San Ange▇▇ 25 26 1 Prescott/Flagstaff 6 12 6 Pueblo/Grand Junction 14 14 -- Phase 3A Eagle Pass/Del Rio 3 6 3 Farmington 3 3 -- Roswell/Carlsbad 6 6 -- Gallup 4 4 -- Phase 3B I-17 -- 13 13 I-25 -- 17 17 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTALS 217 288 71 Engineering Service Contract Amendment 1 September 1, 1999
View Source
Pursuant to Paragraph 3. 1, (1) either the Independent Fiduciary does not approve the release or the Settlement Agreement, or disapproves the release or the Settlement Agreement for any reason whatsoever, or MFS reasonably concludes that the
View Source

Related to Pursuant to Paragraph 3

  • Pursuant to G S. 143-59.2(b), the undersigned hereby certifies that none of the Contractor’s officers, directors, or owners (if the Contractor is an unincorporated business entity) has been convicted of any violation of Chapter 78A of the General Statutes or the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 within 10 years immediately prior to the date of the bid solicitation.

  • Pursuant to Fed R. CIV. P. 23(e), the Court finds that the Settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate to the Plan and the Settlement Class, and more particularly finds that: a. The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length, under the auspices of an experienced, neutral mediator, by Defense Counsel on the one hand, and by Class Counsel on behalf of the Class Representatives and the Settlement Class, on the other hand; b. Class Representatives and Defendants had sufficient information to evaluate the settlement value of the Class Action; c. If the Settlement had not been achieved, Class Representatives and the Settlement Class faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation; d. The amount of the Settlement— fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000.00)—is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account the costs, risks, and delay of trial and appeal. The method of distributing the Settlement Fund is efficient and requires no filing of claims for participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees with Active Accounts, and requires only a modest Former Participant Claim Form for Former Participants, Beneficiaries, and Alternate Payees without Active Accounts. The Settlement terms related to attorneys’ fees and expenses, and case contribution awards to Class Representatives, do not raise any questions concerning fairness of the Settlement, and there are no agreements, apart from the Settlement, required to be considered under FED. R. CIV. P. 23(e)(2)(C)(iv). The Settlement Amount is within the range of settlement values obtained in similar cases; e. At all times, the Class Representatives and Class Counsel have acted independently of Defendants and in the interest of the Settlement Class; and f. The Court has duly considered and overruled any filed objection(s) to the Settlement to the extent there were any.

  • Pursuant to S B. 1368 of the 83rd Texas Legislature, Regular Session, Vendor is required to make any information created or exchanged with the State pursuant to this Contract, and not otherwise excepted from disclosure under the Texas Public Information Act, available in a format that is accessible by the public at no additional charge to the State.

  • Pursuant to T C.A. § ▇▇-▇▇-▇▇▇, the Charter School may apply for renewal of this Charter Agreement by application submitted no later than April 1 of the year prior to the year in which this Agreement expires and in accordance with Authorizer renewal rules and policies. This Agreement may be renewed without modification, except for the incorporation by attachment of the approved renewal application. The Parties may also amend this Agreement as part of the renewal process.

  • Pursuant to Section 4 01, any amounts collected by a Servicer or the Master Servicer under any insurance policies (other than amounts to be applied to the restoration or repair of the property subject to the related Mortgage or released to the Mortgagor in accordance with the related Servicing Agreement) shall be deposited into the Distribution Account, subject to withdrawal pursuant to Section 4.03. Any cost incurred by the Master Servicer or the related Servicer in maintaining any such insurance (if the Mortgagor defaults in its obligation to do so) shall be added to the amount owing under the Mortgage Loan where the terms of the Mortgage Loan so permit; provided, however, that the addition of any such cost shall not be taken into account for purposes of calculating the distributions to be made to Certificateholders and shall be recoverable by the Master Servicer or such Servicer pursuant to Sections 4.01 and 4.03.