• …is an important factor/concept/idea/ to consider because…
• … will be argued/outlined in this paper.
Once you have finished writing your first draft it is recommended that you spend time revising your work. Proofreading and editing are two different stages of the revision process.
As can be seen in the figure above, there are four main areas that you should review during the editing phase of the revision process. The main things to consider when editing include content, structure, style, and sources. It is important to check that all the content relates to the assignment task, the structure is appropriate for the purposes of the assignment, the writing is academic in style, and that sources have been adequately acknowledged. Use the checklist below when editing your work.
Editing checklist
During proofreading, it is important to check your work for word choice, grammar and spelling, punctuation, and referencing errors. It can be easy to mis-type words like ‘from’ and ‘form’ or mix up words like ‘trail’ and ‘trial’ when writing about research, apply American rather than Australian spelling, include unnecessary commas, or incorrectly format your references list. The checklist below is a useful guide that you can use when proofreading your work.
Proofreading checklist
This chapter has examined the experience of writing assignments. It began by focusing on how to read and break down an assignment question, then highlighted the key components of essays. Next, it examined some techniques for paraphrasing and summarising, and how to build an argument. It concluded with a discussion on planning and structuring your assignment and giving it that essential polish with editing and proofreading. Combining these skills and practising them can greatly improve your success with this very common form of assessment.
Balkis, M., & Duru, E. (2016). Procrastination, self-regulation failure, academic life satisfaction, and affective well-being: underregulation or misregulation form. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31 (3), 439-459.
Custer, N. (2018). Test anxiety and academic procrastination among prelicensure nursing students. Nursing Education Perspectives, 39 (3), 162-163.
Yerdelen, S., McCaffrey, A., & Klassen, R. M. (2016). Longitudinal examination of procrastination and anxiety, and their relation to self-efficacy for self-regulated learning: Latent growth curve modeling. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16 (1), 5-22.
Writing Assignments Copyright © 2023 by Lyle Cleeland and Lisa Moody is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
selected template will load here
This action is not available.
\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)
\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)
\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)
\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)
An assignment statement creates a new variable and gives it a value:
This example makes three assignments. The first assigns a string to a new variable named message ; the second gives the integer 17 to n ; the third assigns the (approximate) value of \(\pi\) to pi .
A common way to represent variables on paper is to write the name with an arrow pointing to its value. This kind of figure is called a state diagram because it shows what state each of the variables is in (think of it as the variable’s state of mind). Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\) shows the result of the previous example.
The importance of real code, exceptional cases, scope of the target, relative precedence of :=, change to evaluation order, differences between assignment expressions and assignment statements, specification changes during implementation, _pydecimal.py, datetime.py, sysconfig.py, simplifying list comprehensions, capturing condition values, changing the scope rules for comprehensions, alternative spellings, special-casing conditional statements, special-casing comprehensions, lowering operator precedence, allowing commas to the right, always requiring parentheses, why not just turn existing assignment into an expression, with assignment expressions, why bother with assignment statements, why not use a sublocal scope and prevent namespace pollution, style guide recommendations, acknowledgements, a numeric example, appendix b: rough code translations for comprehensions, appendix c: no changes to scope semantics.
This is a proposal for creating a way to assign to variables within an expression using the notation NAME := expr .
As part of this change, there is also an update to dictionary comprehension evaluation order to ensure key expressions are executed before value expressions (allowing the key to be bound to a name and then re-used as part of calculating the corresponding value).
During discussion of this PEP, the operator became informally known as “the walrus operator”. The construct’s formal name is “Assignment Expressions” (as per the PEP title), but they may also be referred to as “Named Expressions” (e.g. the CPython reference implementation uses that name internally).
Naming the result of an expression is an important part of programming, allowing a descriptive name to be used in place of a longer expression, and permitting reuse. Currently, this feature is available only in statement form, making it unavailable in list comprehensions and other expression contexts.
Additionally, naming sub-parts of a large expression can assist an interactive debugger, providing useful display hooks and partial results. Without a way to capture sub-expressions inline, this would require refactoring of the original code; with assignment expressions, this merely requires the insertion of a few name := markers. Removing the need to refactor reduces the likelihood that the code be inadvertently changed as part of debugging (a common cause of Heisenbugs), and is easier to dictate to another programmer.
During the development of this PEP many people (supporters and critics both) have had a tendency to focus on toy examples on the one hand, and on overly complex examples on the other.
The danger of toy examples is twofold: they are often too abstract to make anyone go “ooh, that’s compelling”, and they are easily refuted with “I would never write it that way anyway”.
The danger of overly complex examples is that they provide a convenient strawman for critics of the proposal to shoot down (“that’s obfuscated”).
Yet there is some use for both extremely simple and extremely complex examples: they are helpful to clarify the intended semantics. Therefore, there will be some of each below.
However, in order to be compelling , examples should be rooted in real code, i.e. code that was written without any thought of this PEP, as part of a useful application, however large or small. Tim Peters has been extremely helpful by going over his own personal code repository and picking examples of code he had written that (in his view) would have been clearer if rewritten with (sparing) use of assignment expressions. His conclusion: the current proposal would have allowed a modest but clear improvement in quite a few bits of code.
Another use of real code is to observe indirectly how much value programmers place on compactness. Guido van Rossum searched through a Dropbox code base and discovered some evidence that programmers value writing fewer lines over shorter lines.
Case in point: Guido found several examples where a programmer repeated a subexpression, slowing down the program, in order to save one line of code, e.g. instead of writing:
they would write:
Another example illustrates that programmers sometimes do more work to save an extra level of indentation:
This code tries to match pattern2 even if pattern1 has a match (in which case the match on pattern2 is never used). The more efficient rewrite would have been:
In most contexts where arbitrary Python expressions can be used, a named expression can appear. This is of the form NAME := expr where expr is any valid Python expression other than an unparenthesized tuple, and NAME is an identifier.
The value of such a named expression is the same as the incorporated expression, with the additional side-effect that the target is assigned that value:
There are a few places where assignment expressions are not allowed, in order to avoid ambiguities or user confusion:
This rule is included to simplify the choice for the user between an assignment statement and an assignment expression – there is no syntactic position where both are valid.
Again, this rule is included to avoid two visually similar ways of saying the same thing.
This rule is included to disallow excessively confusing code, and because parsing keyword arguments is complex enough already.
This rule is included to discourage side effects in a position whose exact semantics are already confusing to many users (cf. the common style recommendation against mutable default values), and also to echo the similar prohibition in calls (the previous bullet).
The reasoning here is similar to the two previous cases; this ungrouped assortment of symbols and operators composed of : and = is hard to read correctly.
This allows lambda to always bind less tightly than := ; having a name binding at the top level inside a lambda function is unlikely to be of value, as there is no way to make use of it. In cases where the name will be used more than once, the expression is likely to need parenthesizing anyway, so this prohibition will rarely affect code.
This shows that what looks like an assignment operator in an f-string is not always an assignment operator. The f-string parser uses : to indicate formatting options. To preserve backwards compatibility, assignment operator usage inside of f-strings must be parenthesized. As noted above, this usage of the assignment operator is not recommended.
An assignment expression does not introduce a new scope. In most cases the scope in which the target will be bound is self-explanatory: it is the current scope. If this scope contains a nonlocal or global declaration for the target, the assignment expression honors that. A lambda (being an explicit, if anonymous, function definition) counts as a scope for this purpose.
There is one special case: an assignment expression occurring in a list, set or dict comprehension or in a generator expression (below collectively referred to as “comprehensions”) binds the target in the containing scope, honoring a nonlocal or global declaration for the target in that scope, if one exists. For the purpose of this rule the containing scope of a nested comprehension is the scope that contains the outermost comprehension. A lambda counts as a containing scope.
The motivation for this special case is twofold. First, it allows us to conveniently capture a “witness” for an any() expression, or a counterexample for all() , for example:
Second, it allows a compact way of updating mutable state from a comprehension, for example:
However, an assignment expression target name cannot be the same as a for -target name appearing in any comprehension containing the assignment expression. The latter names are local to the comprehension in which they appear, so it would be contradictory for a contained use of the same name to refer to the scope containing the outermost comprehension instead.
For example, [i := i+1 for i in range(5)] is invalid: the for i part establishes that i is local to the comprehension, but the i := part insists that i is not local to the comprehension. The same reason makes these examples invalid too:
While it’s technically possible to assign consistent semantics to these cases, it’s difficult to determine whether those semantics actually make sense in the absence of real use cases. Accordingly, the reference implementation [1] will ensure that such cases raise SyntaxError , rather than executing with implementation defined behaviour.
This restriction applies even if the assignment expression is never executed:
For the comprehension body (the part before the first “for” keyword) and the filter expression (the part after “if” and before any nested “for”), this restriction applies solely to target names that are also used as iteration variables in the comprehension. Lambda expressions appearing in these positions introduce a new explicit function scope, and hence may use assignment expressions with no additional restrictions.
Due to design constraints in the reference implementation (the symbol table analyser cannot easily detect when names are re-used between the leftmost comprehension iterable expression and the rest of the comprehension), named expressions are disallowed entirely as part of comprehension iterable expressions (the part after each “in”, and before any subsequent “if” or “for” keyword):
A further exception applies when an assignment expression occurs in a comprehension whose containing scope is a class scope. If the rules above were to result in the target being assigned in that class’s scope, the assignment expression is expressly invalid. This case also raises SyntaxError :
(The reason for the latter exception is the implicit function scope created for comprehensions – there is currently no runtime mechanism for a function to refer to a variable in the containing class scope, and we do not want to add such a mechanism. If this issue ever gets resolved this special case may be removed from the specification of assignment expressions. Note that the problem already exists for using a variable defined in the class scope from a comprehension.)
See Appendix B for some examples of how the rules for targets in comprehensions translate to equivalent code.
The := operator groups more tightly than a comma in all syntactic positions where it is legal, but less tightly than all other operators, including or , and , not , and conditional expressions ( A if C else B ). As follows from section “Exceptional cases” above, it is never allowed at the same level as = . In case a different grouping is desired, parentheses should be used.
The := operator may be used directly in a positional function call argument; however it is invalid directly in a keyword argument.
Some examples to clarify what’s technically valid or invalid:
Most of the “valid” examples above are not recommended, since human readers of Python source code who are quickly glancing at some code may miss the distinction. But simple cases are not objectionable:
This PEP recommends always putting spaces around := , similar to PEP 8 ’s recommendation for = when used for assignment, whereas the latter disallows spaces around = used for keyword arguments.)
In order to have precisely defined semantics, the proposal requires evaluation order to be well-defined. This is technically not a new requirement, as function calls may already have side effects. Python already has a rule that subexpressions are generally evaluated from left to right. However, assignment expressions make these side effects more visible, and we propose a single change to the current evaluation order:
Most importantly, since := is an expression, it can be used in contexts where statements are illegal, including lambda functions and comprehensions.
Conversely, assignment expressions don’t support the advanced features found in assignment statements:
The following changes have been made based on implementation experience and additional review after the PEP was first accepted and before Python 3.8 was released:
env_base is only used on these lines, putting its assignment on the if moves it as the “header” of the block.
Avoid nested if and remove one indentation level.
Code looks more regular and avoid multiple nested if. (See Appendix A for the origin of this example.)
tz is only used for s += tz , moving its assignment inside the if helps to show its scope.
Calling fp.readline() in the while condition and calling .match() on the if lines make the code more compact without making it harder to understand.
A list comprehension can map and filter efficiently by capturing the condition:
Similarly, a subexpression can be reused within the main expression, by giving it a name on first use:
Note that in both cases the variable y is bound in the containing scope (i.e. at the same level as results or stuff ).
Assignment expressions can be used to good effect in the header of an if or while statement:
Particularly with the while loop, this can remove the need to have an infinite loop, an assignment, and a condition. It also creates a smooth parallel between a loop which simply uses a function call as its condition, and one which uses that as its condition but also uses the actual value.
An example from the low-level UNIX world:
Proposals broadly similar to this one have come up frequently on python-ideas. Below are a number of alternative syntaxes, some of them specific to comprehensions, which have been rejected in favour of the one given above.
A previous version of this PEP proposed subtle changes to the scope rules for comprehensions, to make them more usable in class scope and to unify the scope of the “outermost iterable” and the rest of the comprehension. However, this part of the proposal would have caused backwards incompatibilities, and has been withdrawn so the PEP can focus on assignment expressions.
Broadly the same semantics as the current proposal, but spelled differently.
Since EXPR as NAME already has meaning in import , except and with statements (with different semantics), this would create unnecessary confusion or require special-casing (e.g. to forbid assignment within the headers of these statements).
(Note that with EXPR as VAR does not simply assign the value of EXPR to VAR – it calls EXPR.__enter__() and assigns the result of that to VAR .)
Additional reasons to prefer := over this spelling include:
To the contrary, the assignment expression does not belong to the if or while that starts the line, and we intentionally allow assignment expressions in other contexts as well.
reinforces the visual recognition of assignment expressions.
This syntax is inspired by languages such as R and Haskell, and some programmable calculators. (Note that a left-facing arrow y <- f(x) is not possible in Python, as it would be interpreted as less-than and unary minus.) This syntax has a slight advantage over ‘as’ in that it does not conflict with with , except and import , but otherwise is equivalent. But it is entirely unrelated to Python’s other use of -> (function return type annotations), and compared to := (which dates back to Algol-58) it has a much weaker tradition.
This has the advantage that leaked usage can be readily detected, removing some forms of syntactic ambiguity. However, this would be the only place in Python where a variable’s scope is encoded into its name, making refactoring harder.
Execution order is inverted (the indented body is performed first, followed by the “header”). This requires a new keyword, unless an existing keyword is repurposed (most likely with: ). See PEP 3150 for prior discussion on this subject (with the proposed keyword being given: ).
This syntax has fewer conflicts than as does (conflicting only with the raise Exc from Exc notation), but is otherwise comparable to it. Instead of paralleling with expr as target: (which can be useful but can also be confusing), this has no parallels, but is evocative.
One of the most popular use-cases is if and while statements. Instead of a more general solution, this proposal enhances the syntax of these two statements to add a means of capturing the compared value:
This works beautifully if and ONLY if the desired condition is based on the truthiness of the captured value. It is thus effective for specific use-cases (regex matches, socket reads that return '' when done), and completely useless in more complicated cases (e.g. where the condition is f(x) < 0 and you want to capture the value of f(x) ). It also has no benefit to list comprehensions.
Advantages: No syntactic ambiguities. Disadvantages: Answers only a fraction of possible use-cases, even in if / while statements.
Another common use-case is comprehensions (list/set/dict, and genexps). As above, proposals have been made for comprehension-specific solutions.
This brings the subexpression to a location in between the ‘for’ loop and the expression. It introduces an additional language keyword, which creates conflicts. Of the three, where reads the most cleanly, but also has the greatest potential for conflict (e.g. SQLAlchemy and numpy have where methods, as does tkinter.dnd.Icon in the standard library).
As above, but reusing the with keyword. Doesn’t read too badly, and needs no additional language keyword. Is restricted to comprehensions, though, and cannot as easily be transformed into “longhand” for-loop syntax. Has the C problem that an equals sign in an expression can now create a name binding, rather than performing a comparison. Would raise the question of why “with NAME = EXPR:” cannot be used as a statement on its own.
As per option 2, but using as rather than an equals sign. Aligns syntactically with other uses of as for name binding, but a simple transformation to for-loop longhand would create drastically different semantics; the meaning of with inside a comprehension would be completely different from the meaning as a stand-alone statement, while retaining identical syntax.
Regardless of the spelling chosen, this introduces a stark difference between comprehensions and the equivalent unrolled long-hand form of the loop. It is no longer possible to unwrap the loop into statement form without reworking any name bindings. The only keyword that can be repurposed to this task is with , thus giving it sneakily different semantics in a comprehension than in a statement; alternatively, a new keyword is needed, with all the costs therein.
There are two logical precedences for the := operator. Either it should bind as loosely as possible, as does statement-assignment; or it should bind more tightly than comparison operators. Placing its precedence between the comparison and arithmetic operators (to be precise: just lower than bitwise OR) allows most uses inside while and if conditions to be spelled without parentheses, as it is most likely that you wish to capture the value of something, then perform a comparison on it:
Once find() returns -1, the loop terminates. If := binds as loosely as = does, this would capture the result of the comparison (generally either True or False ), which is less useful.
While this behaviour would be convenient in many situations, it is also harder to explain than “the := operator behaves just like the assignment statement”, and as such, the precedence for := has been made as close as possible to that of = (with the exception that it binds tighter than comma).
Some critics have claimed that the assignment expressions should allow unparenthesized tuples on the right, so that these two would be equivalent:
(With the current version of the proposal, the latter would be equivalent to ((point := x), y) .)
However, adopting this stance would logically lead to the conclusion that when used in a function call, assignment expressions also bind less tight than comma, so we’d have the following confusing equivalence:
The less confusing option is to make := bind more tightly than comma.
It’s been proposed to just always require parentheses around an assignment expression. This would resolve many ambiguities, and indeed parentheses will frequently be needed to extract the desired subexpression. But in the following cases the extra parentheses feel redundant:
C and its derivatives define the = operator as an expression, rather than a statement as is Python’s way. This allows assignments in more contexts, including contexts where comparisons are more common. The syntactic similarity between if (x == y) and if (x = y) belies their drastically different semantics. Thus this proposal uses := to clarify the distinction.
The two forms have different flexibilities. The := operator can be used inside a larger expression; the = statement can be augmented to += and its friends, can be chained, and can assign to attributes and subscripts.
Previous revisions of this proposal involved sublocal scope (restricted to a single statement), preventing name leakage and namespace pollution. While a definite advantage in a number of situations, this increases complexity in many others, and the costs are not justified by the benefits. In the interests of language simplicity, the name bindings created here are exactly equivalent to any other name bindings, including that usage at class or module scope will create externally-visible names. This is no different from for loops or other constructs, and can be solved the same way: del the name once it is no longer needed, or prefix it with an underscore.
(The author wishes to thank Guido van Rossum and Christoph Groth for their suggestions to move the proposal in this direction. [2] )
As expression assignments can sometimes be used equivalently to statement assignments, the question of which should be preferred will arise. For the benefit of style guides such as PEP 8 , two recommendations are suggested.
The authors wish to thank Alyssa Coghlan and Steven D’Aprano for their considerable contributions to this proposal, and members of the core-mentorship mailing list for assistance with implementation.
Here’s a brief essay Tim Peters wrote on the topic.
I dislike “busy” lines of code, and also dislike putting conceptually unrelated logic on a single line. So, for example, instead of:
instead. So I suspected I’d find few places I’d want to use assignment expressions. I didn’t even consider them for lines already stretching halfway across the screen. In other cases, “unrelated” ruled:
is a vast improvement over the briefer:
The original two statements are doing entirely different conceptual things, and slamming them together is conceptually insane.
In other cases, combining related logic made it harder to understand, such as rewriting:
as the briefer:
The while test there is too subtle, crucially relying on strict left-to-right evaluation in a non-short-circuiting or method-chaining context. My brain isn’t wired that way.
But cases like that were rare. Name binding is very frequent, and “sparse is better than dense” does not mean “almost empty is better than sparse”. For example, I have many functions that return None or 0 to communicate “I have nothing useful to return in this case, but since that’s expected often I’m not going to annoy you with an exception”. This is essentially the same as regular expression search functions returning None when there is no match. So there was lots of code of the form:
I find that clearer, and certainly a bit less typing and pattern-matching reading, as:
It’s also nice to trade away a small amount of horizontal whitespace to get another _line_ of surrounding code on screen. I didn’t give much weight to this at first, but it was so very frequent it added up, and I soon enough became annoyed that I couldn’t actually run the briefer code. That surprised me!
There are other cases where assignment expressions really shine. Rather than pick another from my code, Kirill Balunov gave a lovely example from the standard library’s copy() function in copy.py :
The ever-increasing indentation is semantically misleading: the logic is conceptually flat, “the first test that succeeds wins”:
Using easy assignment expressions allows the visual structure of the code to emphasize the conceptual flatness of the logic; ever-increasing indentation obscured it.
A smaller example from my code delighted me, both allowing to put inherently related logic in a single line, and allowing to remove an annoying “artificial” indentation level:
That if is about as long as I want my lines to get, but remains easy to follow.
So, in all, in most lines binding a name, I wouldn’t use assignment expressions, but because that construct is so very frequent, that leaves many places I would. In most of the latter, I found a small win that adds up due to how often it occurs, and in the rest I found a moderate to major win. I’d certainly use it more often than ternary if , but significantly less often than augmented assignment.
I have another example that quite impressed me at the time.
Where all variables are positive integers, and a is at least as large as the n’th root of x, this algorithm returns the floor of the n’th root of x (and roughly doubling the number of accurate bits per iteration):
It’s not obvious why that works, but is no more obvious in the “loop and a half” form. It’s hard to prove correctness without building on the right insight (the “arithmetic mean - geometric mean inequality”), and knowing some non-trivial things about how nested floor functions behave. That is, the challenges are in the math, not really in the coding.
If you do know all that, then the assignment-expression form is easily read as “while the current guess is too large, get a smaller guess”, where the “too large?” test and the new guess share an expensive sub-expression.
To my eyes, the original form is harder to understand:
This appendix attempts to clarify (though not specify) the rules when a target occurs in a comprehension or in a generator expression. For a number of illustrative examples we show the original code, containing a comprehension, and the translation, where the comprehension has been replaced by an equivalent generator function plus some scaffolding.
Since [x for ...] is equivalent to list(x for ...) these examples all use list comprehensions without loss of generality. And since these examples are meant to clarify edge cases of the rules, they aren’t trying to look like real code.
Note: comprehensions are already implemented via synthesizing nested generator functions like those in this appendix. The new part is adding appropriate declarations to establish the intended scope of assignment expression targets (the same scope they resolve to as if the assignment were performed in the block containing the outermost comprehension). For type inference purposes, these illustrative expansions do not imply that assignment expression targets are always Optional (but they do indicate the target binding scope).
Let’s start with a reminder of what code is generated for a generator expression without assignment expression.
Let’s add a simple assignment expression.
Let’s add a global TARGET declaration in f() .
Or instead let’s add a nonlocal TARGET declaration in f() .
Finally, let’s nest two comprehensions.
Because it has been a point of confusion, note that nothing about Python’s scoping semantics is changed. Function-local scopes continue to be resolved at compile time, and to have indefinite temporal extent at run time (“full closures”). Example:
This document has been placed in the public domain.
Source: https://github.com/python/peps/blob/main/peps/pep-0572.rst
Last modified: 2023-10-11 12:05:51 GMT
The assignment of a right or obligation is a common contractual event under the law and the right to assign (or prohibition against assignments) is found in the majority of agreements, leases and business structural documents created in the United States.
As with many terms commonly used, people are familiar with the term but often are not aware or fully aware of what the terms entail. The concept of assignment of rights and obligations is one of those simple concepts with wide ranging ramifications in the contractual and business context and the law imposes severe restrictions on the validity and effect of assignment in many instances. Clear contractual provisions concerning assignments and rights should be in every document and structure created and this article will outline why such drafting is essential for the creation of appropriate and effective contracts and structures.
The reader should first read the article on Limited Liability Entities in the United States and Contracts since the information in those articles will be assumed in this article.
Basic Definitions and Concepts:
An assignment is the transfer of rights held by one party called the “assignor” to another party called the “assignee.” The legal nature of the assignment and the contractual terms of the agreement between the parties determines some additional rights and liabilities that accompany the assignment. The assignment of rights under a contract usually completely transfers the rights to the assignee to receive the benefits accruing under the contract. Ordinarily, the term assignment is limited to the transfer of rights that are intangible, like contractual rights and rights connected with property. Merchants Service Co. v. Small Claims Court , 35 Cal. 2d 109, 113-114 (Cal. 1950).
An assignment will generally be permitted under the law unless there is an express prohibition against assignment in the underlying contract or lease. Where assignments are permitted, the assignor need not consult the other party to the contract but may merely assign the rights at that time. However, an assignment cannot have any adverse effect on the duties of the other party to the contract, nor can it diminish the chance of the other party receiving complete performance. The assignor normally remains liable unless there is an agreement to the contrary by the other party to the contract.
The effect of a valid assignment is to remove privity between the assignor and the obligor and create privity between the obligor and the assignee. Privity is usually defined as a direct and immediate contractual relationship. See Merchants case above.
Further, for the assignment to be effective in most jurisdictions, it must occur in the present. One does not normally assign a future right; the assignment vests immediate rights and obligations.
No specific language is required to create an assignment so long as the assignor makes clear his/her intent to assign identified contractual rights to the assignee. Since expensive litigation can erupt from ambiguous or vague language, obtaining the correct verbiage is vital. An agreement must manifest the intent to transfer rights and can either be oral or in writing and the rights assigned must be certain.
Note that an assignment of an interest is the transfer of some identifiable property, claim, or right from the assignor to the assignee. The assignment operates to transfer to the assignee all of the rights, title, or interest of the assignor in the thing assigned. A transfer of all rights, title, and interests conveys everything that the assignor owned in the thing assigned and the assignee stands in the shoes of the assignor. Knott v. McDonald’s Corp ., 985 F. Supp. 1222 (N.D. Cal. 1997)
The parties must intend to effectuate an assignment at the time of the transfer, although no particular language or procedure is necessary. As long ago as the case of National Reserve Co. v. Metropolitan Trust Co ., 17 Cal. 2d 827 (Cal. 1941), the court held that in determining what rights or interests pass under an assignment, the intention of the parties as manifested in the instrument is controlling.
The intent of the parties to an assignment is a question of fact to be derived not only from the instrument executed by the parties but also from the surrounding circumstances. When there is no writing to evidence the intention to transfer some identifiable property, claim, or right, it is necessary to scrutinize the surrounding circumstances and parties’ acts to ascertain their intentions. Strosberg v. Brauvin Realty Servs., 295 Ill. App. 3d 17 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. 1998)
The general rule applicable to assignments of choses in action is that an assignment, unless there is a contract to the contrary, carries with it all securities held by the assignor as collateral to the claim and all rights incidental thereto and vests in the assignee the equitable title to such collateral securities and incidental rights. An unqualified assignment of a contract or chose in action, however, with no indication of the intent of the parties, vests in the assignee the assigned contract or chose and all rights and remedies incidental thereto.
More examples: In Strosberg v. Brauvin Realty Servs ., 295 Ill. App. 3d 17 (Ill. App. Ct. 1st Dist. 1998), the court held that the assignee of a party to a subordination agreement is entitled to the benefits and is subject to the burdens of the agreement. In Florida E. C. R. Co. v. Eno , 99 Fla. 887 (Fla. 1930), the court held that the mere assignment of all sums due in and of itself creates no different or other liability of the owner to the assignee than that which existed from the owner to the assignor.
And note that even though an assignment vests in the assignee all rights, remedies, and contingent benefits which are incidental to the thing assigned, those which are personal to the assignor and for his sole benefit are not assigned. Rasp v. Hidden Valley Lake, Inc ., 519 N.E.2d 153, 158 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988). Thus, if the underlying agreement provides that a service can only be provided to X, X cannot assign that right to Y.
Novation Compared to Assignment:
Although the difference between a novation and an assignment may appear narrow, it is an essential one. “Novation is a act whereby one party transfers all its obligations and benefits under a contract to a third party.” In a novation, a third party successfully substitutes the original party as a party to the contract. “When a contract is novated, the other contracting party must be left in the same position he was in prior to the novation being made.”
A sublease is the transfer when a tenant retains some right of reentry onto the leased premises. However, if the tenant transfers the entire leasehold estate, retaining no right of reentry or other reversionary interest, then the transfer is an assignment. The assignor is normally also removed from liability to the landlord only if the landlord consents or allowed that right in the lease. In a sublease, the original tenant is not released from the obligations of the original lease.
Equitable Assignments:
An equitable assignment is one in which one has a future interest and is not valid at law but valid in a court of equity. In National Bank of Republic v. United Sec. Life Ins. & Trust Co. , 17 App. D.C. 112 (D.C. Cir. 1900), the court held that to constitute an equitable assignment of a chose in action, the following has to occur generally: anything said written or done, in pursuance of an agreement and for valuable consideration, or in consideration of an antecedent debt, to place a chose in action or fund out of the control of the owner, and appropriate it to or in favor of another person, amounts to an equitable assignment. Thus, an agreement, between a debtor and a creditor, that the debt shall be paid out of a specific fund going to the debtor may operate as an equitable assignment.
In Egyptian Navigation Co. v. Baker Invs. Corp. , 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30804 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 14, 2008), the court stated that an equitable assignment occurs under English law when an assignor, with an intent to transfer his/her right to a chose in action, informs the assignee about the right so transferred.
An executory agreement or a declaration of trust are also equitable assignments if unenforceable as assignments by a court of law but enforceable by a court of equity exercising sound discretion according to the circumstances of the case. Since California combines courts of equity and courts of law, the same court would hear arguments as to whether an equitable assignment had occurred. Quite often, such relief is granted to avoid fraud or unjust enrichment.
Note that obtaining an assignment through fraudulent means invalidates the assignment. Fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters. It vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments. Walker v. Rich , 79 Cal. App. 139 (Cal. App. 1926). If an assignment is made with the fraudulent intent to delay, hinder, and defraud creditors, then it is void as fraudulent in fact. See our article on Transfers to Defraud Creditors .
But note that the motives that prompted an assignor to make the transfer will be considered as immaterial and will constitute no defense to an action by the assignee, if an assignment is considered as valid in all other respects.
Enforceability of Assignments:
Whether a right under a contract is capable of being transferred is determined by the law of the place where the contract was entered into. The validity and effect of an assignment is determined by the law of the place of assignment. The validity of an assignment of a contractual right is governed by the law of the state with the most significant relationship to the assignment and the parties.
In some jurisdictions, the traditional conflict of laws rules governing assignments has been rejected and the law of the place having the most significant contacts with the assignment applies. In Downs v. American Mut. Liability Ins. Co ., 14 N.Y.2d 266 (N.Y. 1964), a wife and her husband separated and the wife obtained a judgment of separation from the husband in New York. The judgment required the husband to pay a certain yearly sum to the wife. The husband assigned 50 percent of his future salary, wages, and earnings to the wife. The agreement authorized the employer to make such payments to the wife.
After the husband moved from New York, the wife learned that he was employed by an employer in Massachusetts. She sent the proper notice and demanded payment under the agreement. The employer refused and the wife brought an action for enforcement. The court observed that Massachusetts did not prohibit assignment of the husband’s wages. Moreover, Massachusetts law was not controlling because New York had the most significant relationship with the assignment. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of the wife.
Therefore, the validity of an assignment is determined by looking to the law of the forum with the most significant relationship to the assignment itself. To determine the applicable law of assignments, the court must look to the law of the state which is most significantly related to the principal issue before it.
Assignment of Contractual Rights:
Generally, the law allows the assignment of a contractual right unless the substitution of rights would materially change the duty of the obligor, materially increase the burden or risk imposed on the obligor by the contract, materially impair the chance of obtaining return performance, or materially reduce the value of the performance to the obligor. Restat 2d of Contracts, § 317(2)(a). This presumes that the underlying agreement is silent on the right to assign.
If the contract specifically precludes assignment, the contractual right is not assignable. Whether a contract is assignable is a matter of contractual intent and one must look to the language used by the parties to discern that intent.
In the absence of an express provision to the contrary, the rights and duties under a bilateral executory contract that does not involve personal skill, trust, or confidence may be assigned without the consent of the other party. But note that an assignment is invalid if it would materially alter the other party’s duties and responsibilities. Once an assignment is effective, the assignee stands in the shoes of the assignor and assumes all of assignor’s rights. Hence, after a valid assignment, the assignor’s right to performance is extinguished, transferred to assignee, and the assignee possesses the same rights, benefits, and remedies assignor once possessed. Robert Lamb Hart Planners & Architects v. Evergreen, Ltd. , 787 F. Supp. 753 (S.D. Ohio 1992).
On the other hand, an assignee’s right against the obligor is subject to “all of the limitations of the assignor’s right, all defenses thereto, and all set-offs and counterclaims which would have been available against the assignor had there been no assignment, provided that these defenses and set-offs are based on facts existing at the time of the assignment.” See Robert Lamb , case, above.
The power of the contract to restrict assignment is broad. Usually, contractual provisions that restrict assignment of the contract without the consent of the obligor are valid and enforceable, even when there is statutory authorization for the assignment. The restriction of the power to assign is often ineffective unless the restriction is expressly and precisely stated. Anti-assignment clauses are effective only if they contain clear, unambiguous language of prohibition. Anti-assignment clauses protect only the obligor and do not affect the transaction between the assignee and assignor.
Usually, a prohibition against the assignment of a contract does not prevent an assignment of the right to receive payments due, unless circumstances indicate the contrary. Moreover, the contracting parties cannot, by a mere non-assignment provision, prevent the effectual alienation of the right to money which becomes due under the contract.
A contract provision prohibiting or restricting an assignment may be waived, or a party may so act as to be estopped from objecting to the assignment, such as by effectively ratifying the assignment. The power to void an assignment made in violation of an anti-assignment clause may be waived either before or after the assignment. See our article on Contracts.
Noncompete Clauses and Assignments:
Of critical import to most buyers of businesses is the ability to ensure that key employees of the business being purchased cannot start a competing company. Some states strictly limit such clauses, some do allow them. California does restrict noncompete clauses, only allowing them under certain circumstances. A common question in those states that do allow them is whether such rights can be assigned to a new party, such as the buyer of the buyer.
A covenant not to compete, also called a non-competitive clause, is a formal agreement prohibiting one party from performing similar work or business within a designated area for a specified amount of time. This type of clause is generally included in contracts between employer and employee and contracts between buyer and seller of a business.
Many workers sign a covenant not to compete as part of the paperwork required for employment. It may be a separate document similar to a non-disclosure agreement, or buried within a number of other clauses in a contract. A covenant not to compete is generally legal and enforceable, although there are some exceptions and restrictions.
Whenever a company recruits skilled employees, it invests a significant amount of time and training. For example, it often takes years before a research chemist or a design engineer develops a workable knowledge of a company’s product line, including trade secrets and highly sensitive information. Once an employee gains this knowledge and experience, however, all sorts of things can happen. The employee could work for the company until retirement, accept a better offer from a competing company or start up his or her own business.
A covenant not to compete may cover a number of potential issues between employers and former employees. Many companies spend years developing a local base of customers or clients. It is important that this customer base not fall into the hands of local competitors. When an employee signs a covenant not to compete, he or she usually agrees not to use insider knowledge of the company’s customer base to disadvantage the company. The covenant not to compete often defines a broad geographical area considered off-limits to former employees, possibly tens or hundreds of miles.
Another area of concern covered by a covenant not to compete is a potential ‘brain drain’. Some high-level former employees may seek to recruit others from the same company to create new competition. Retention of employees, especially those with unique skills or proprietary knowledge, is vital for most companies, so a covenant not to compete may spell out definite restrictions on the hiring or recruiting of employees.
A covenant not to compete may also define a specific amount of time before a former employee can seek employment in a similar field. Many companies offer a substantial severance package to make sure former employees are financially solvent until the terms of the covenant not to compete have been met.
Because the use of a covenant not to compete can be controversial, a handful of states, including California, have largely banned this type of contractual language. The legal enforcement of these agreements falls on individual states, and many have sided with the employee during arbitration or litigation. A covenant not to compete must be reasonable and specific, with defined time periods and coverage areas. If the agreement gives the company too much power over former employees or is ambiguous, state courts may declare it to be overbroad and therefore unenforceable. In such case, the employee would be free to pursue any employment opportunity, including working for a direct competitor or starting up a new company of his or her own.
It has been held that an employee’s covenant not to compete is assignable where one business is transferred to another, that a merger does not constitute an assignment of a covenant not to compete, and that a covenant not to compete is enforceable by a successor to the employer where the assignment does not create an added burden of employment or other disadvantage to the employee. However, in some states such as Hawaii, it has also been held that a covenant not to compete is not assignable and under various statutes for various reasons that such covenants are not enforceable against an employee by a successor to the employer. Hawaii v. Gannett Pac. Corp. , 99 F. Supp. 2d 1241 (D. Haw. 1999)
It is vital to obtain the relevant law of the applicable state before drafting or attempting to enforce assignment rights in this particular area.
Conclusion:
In the current business world of fast changing structures, agreements, employees and projects, the ability to assign rights and obligations is essential to allow flexibility and adjustment to new situations. Conversely, the ability to hold a contracting party into the deal may be essential for the future of a party. Thus, the law of assignments and the restriction on same is a critical aspect of every agreement and every structure. This basic provision is often glanced at by the contracting parties, or scribbled into the deal at the last minute but can easily become the most vital part of the transaction.
As an example, one client of ours came into the office outraged that his co venturer on a sizable exporting agreement, who had excellent connections in Brazil, had elected to pursue another venture instead and assigned the agreement to a party unknown to our client and without the business contacts our client considered vital. When we examined the handwritten agreement our client had drafted in a restaurant in Sao Paolo, we discovered there was no restriction on assignment whatsoever…our client had not even considered that right when drafting the agreement after a full day of work.
One choses who one does business with carefully…to ensure that one’s choice remains the party on the other side of the contract, one must master the ability to negotiate proper assignment provisions.
Founded in 1939, our law firm combines the ability to represent clients in domestic or international matters with the personal interaction with clients that is traditional to a long established law firm.
Read more about our firm
© 2024, Stimmel, Stimmel & Roeser, All rights reserved | Terms of Use | Site by Bay Design
Teaching excellence & educational innovation, creating assignments.
Here are some general suggestions and questions to consider when creating assignments. There are also many other resources in print and on the web that provide examples of interesting, discipline-specific assignment ideas.
What do you want students to learn in your course? What could they do that would show you that they have learned it? To determine assignments that truly serve your course objectives, it is useful to write out your objectives in this form: I want my students to be able to ____. Use active, measurable verbs as you complete that sentence (e.g., compare theories, discuss ramifications, recommend strategies), and your learning objectives will point you towards suitable assignments.
This is the fun side of assignment design. Consider how to focus students’ thinking in ways that are creative, challenging, and motivating. Think beyond the conventional assignment type! For example, one American historian requires students to write diary entries for a hypothetical Nebraska farmwoman in the 1890s. By specifying that students’ diary entries must demonstrate the breadth of their historical knowledge (e.g., gender, economics, technology, diet, family structure), the instructor gets students to exercise their imaginations while also accomplishing the learning objectives of the course (Walvoord & Anderson, 1989, p. 25).
After creating your assignments, go back to your learning objectives and make sure there is still a good match between what you want students to learn and what you are asking them to do. If you find a mismatch, you will need to adjust either the assignments or the learning objectives. For instance, if your goal is for students to be able to analyze and evaluate texts, but your assignments only ask them to summarize texts, you would need to add an analytical and evaluative dimension to some assignments or rethink your learning objectives.
Students can be misled by assignments that are named inappropriately. For example, if you want students to analyze a product’s strengths and weaknesses but you call the assignment a “product description,” students may focus all their energies on the descriptive, not the critical, elements of the task. Thus, it is important to ensure that the titles of your assignments communicate their intention accurately to students.
Think about how to order your assignments so that they build skills in a logical sequence. Ideally, assignments that require the most synthesis of skills and knowledge should come later in the semester, preceded by smaller assignments that build these skills incrementally. For example, if an instructor’s final assignment is a research project that requires students to evaluate a technological solution to an environmental problem, earlier assignments should reinforce component skills, including the ability to identify and discuss key environmental issues, apply evaluative criteria, and find appropriate research sources.
Consider your intended assignments in relation to the academic calendar and decide how they can be reasonably spaced throughout the semester, taking into account holidays and key campus events. Consider how long it will take students to complete all parts of the assignment (e.g., planning, library research, reading, coordinating groups, writing, integrating the contributions of team members, developing a presentation), and be sure to allow sufficient time between assignments.
Is the workload you have in mind reasonable for your students? Is the grading burden manageable for you? Sometimes there are ways to reduce workload (whether for you or for students) without compromising learning objectives. For example, if a primary objective in assigning a project is for students to identify an interesting engineering problem and do some preliminary research on it, it might be reasonable to require students to submit a project proposal and annotated bibliography rather than a fully developed report. If your learning objectives are clear, you will see where corners can be cut without sacrificing educational quality.
If an assignment is vague, students may interpret it any number of ways – and not necessarily how you intended. Thus, it is critical to clearly and unambiguously identify the task students are to do (e.g., design a website to help high school students locate environmental resources, create an annotated bibliography of readings on apartheid). It can be helpful to differentiate the central task (what students are supposed to produce) from other advice and information you provide in your assignment description.
Different instructors apply different criteria when grading student work, so it’s important that you clearly articulate to students what your criteria are. To do so, think about the best student work you have seen on similar tasks and try to identify the specific characteristics that made it excellent, such as clarity of thought, originality, logical organization, or use of a wide range of sources. Then identify the characteristics of the worst student work you have seen, such as shaky evidence, weak organizational structure, or lack of focus. Identifying these characteristics can help you consciously articulate the criteria you already apply. It is important to communicate these criteria to students, whether in your assignment description or as a separate rubric or scoring guide . Clearly articulated performance criteria can prevent unnecessary confusion about your expectations while also setting a high standard for students to meet.
Students make assumptions about the audience they are addressing in papers and presentations, which influences how they pitch their message. For example, students may assume that, since the instructor is their primary audience, they do not need to define discipline-specific terms or concepts. These assumptions may not match the instructor’s expectations. Thus, it is important on assignments to specify the intended audience http://wac.colostate.edu/intro/pop10e.cfm (e.g., undergraduates with no biology background, a potential funder who does not know engineering).
If students are unclear about the goals or purpose of the assignment, they may make unnecessary mistakes. For example, if students believe an assignment is focused on summarizing research as opposed to evaluating it, they may seriously miscalculate the task and put their energies in the wrong place. The same is true they think the goal of an economics problem set is to find the correct answer, rather than demonstrate a clear chain of economic reasoning. Consequently, it is important to make your objectives for the assignment clear to students.
If you have specific parameters in mind for the assignment (e.g., length, size, formatting, citation conventions) you should be sure to specify them in your assignment description. Otherwise, students may misapply conventions and formats they learned in other courses that are not appropriate for yours.
Here is a set of questions you can ask yourself when creating an assignment.
Adapted from the WAC Clearinghouse at http://wac.colostate.edu/intro/pop10e.cfm .
CONTACT US to talk with an Eberly colleague in person!
FAC Number: 2024-05 Effective Date: 05/22/2024
32.800 scope of subpart..
This subpart prescribes policies and procedures for the assignment of claims under the Assignment of Claims Act of1940, as amended, ( 31 U.S.C.3727 , 41 U.S.C.6305 ) (hereafter referred to as "the Act").
Designated agency , as used in this subpart, means any department or agency of the executive branch of the United States Government (see 32.803 (d)).
No-setoff commitment , as used in this subpart, means a contractual undertaking that, to the extent permitted by the Act, payments by the designated agency to the assignee under an assignment of claims will not be reduced to liquidate the indebtedness of the contractor to the Government.
Under the Assignment of Claims Act, a contractor may assign moneys due or to become due under a contract if all the following conditions are met:
(a) The contract specifies payments aggregating $1,000 or more.
(b) The assignment is made to a bank, trust company, or other financing institution, including any Federal lending agency.
(c) The contract does not prohibit the assignment.
(d) Unless otherwise expressly permitted in the contract, the assignment-
(1) Covers all unpaid amounts payable under the contract;
(2) Is made only to one party, except that any assignment may be made to one party as agent or trustee for two or more parties participating in the financing of the contract; and
(3) Is not subject to further assignment.
(e) The assignee sends a written notice of assignment together with a true copy of the assignment instrument to the-
(1) Contracting officer or the agency head ;
(2) Surety on any bond applicable to the contract; and
(3) Disbursing officer designated in the contract to make payment.
(a) Any assignment of claims that has been made under the Act to any type of financing institution listed in 32.802 (b) may thereafter be further assigned and reassigned to any such institution if the conditions in 32.802 (d) and (e) continue to be met.
(b) A contract may prohibit the assignment of claims if the agency determines the prohibition to be in the Government’s interest.
(c) Under a requirements or indefinite quantity type contract that authorizes ordering and payment by multiple Government activities, amounts due for individual orders for $1,000 or more may be assigned.
(d) Any contract of a designated agency (see FAR 32.801 ), except a contract under which full payment has been made, may include a no-setoff commitment only when a determination of need is made by the head of the agency , in accordance with the Presidential delegation of authority dated October 3,1995, and after such determination has been published in the Federal Register. The Presidential delegation makes such determinations of need subject to further guidance issued by the Office of Federal Procurement Policy. The following guidance has been provided:
Use of the no-setoff provision may be appropriate to facilitate the national defense ; in the event of a national emergency or natural disaster; or when the use of the no-setoff provision may facilitate private financing of contract performance. However, in the event an offeror is significantly indebted to the United States , the contracting officer should consider whether the inclusion of the no-setoff commitment in a particular contract is in the best interests of the United States . In such an event, the contracting officer should consult with the Government officer(s) responsible for collecting the debt(s).
(e) When an assigned contract does not include a no-setoff commitment , the Government may apply against payments to the assignee any liability of the contractor to the Government arising independently of the assigned contract if the liability existed at the time notice of the assignment was received even though that liability had not yet matured so as to be due and payable.
(a) No payments made by the Government to the assignee under any contract assigned in accordance with the Act may be recovered on account of any liability of the contractor to the Government. This immunity of the assignee is effective whether the contractor’s liability arises from or independently of the assigned contract.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, the inclusion of a no-setoff commitment in an assigned contract entitles the assignee to receive contract payments free of reduction or setoff for-
(1) Any liability of the contractor to the Government arising independently of the contract; and
(2) Any of the following liabilities of the contractor to the Government arising from the assigned contract:
(i) Renegotiation under any statute or contract clause .
(ii) Fines.
(iii) Penalties, exclusive of amounts that may be collected or withheld from the contractor under, or for failure to comply with, the terms of the contract.
(iv) Taxes or social security contributions.
(v) Withholding or nonwithholding of taxes or social security contributions.
(c) In some circumstances, a setoff may be appropriate even though the assigned contract includes a no-setoff commitment ; e.g.-
(1) When the assignee has neither made a loan under the assignment nor made a commitment to do so; or
(2) To the extent that the amount due on the contract exceeds the amount of any loans made or expected to be made under a firm commitment for financing.
(a) Assignments.
(1) Assignments by corporations shall be-
(i) Executed by an authorized representative;
(ii) Attested by the secretary or the assistant secretary of the corporation; and
(iii) Impressed with the corporate seal or accompanied by a true copy of the resolution of the corporation’s board of directors authorizing the signing representative to execute the assignment.
(2) Assignments by a partnership may be signed by one partner, if the assignment is accompanied by adequate evidence that the signer is a general partner of the partnership and is authorized to execute assignments on behalf of the partner-ship.
(3) Assignments by an individual shall be signed by that individual and the signature acknowledged before a notary public or other person authorized to administer oaths.
(b) Filing. The assignee shall forward to each party specified in 32.802 (e) an original and three copies of the notice of assignment, together with one true copy of the instrument of assignment. The true copy shall be a certified duplicate or photostat copy of the original assignment.
(c) Format for notice of assignment. The following is a suggested format for use by an assignee in providing the notice of assignment required by 32.802 (e).
Notice of Assignment
To: ___________ [ Address to one of the parties specified in 32.802 (e) ].
This has reference to Contract No. __________ dated ______, entered into between ______ [ Contractor’s name and address ] and ______ [ Government agency, name of office, and address ], for ________ [ Describe nature of the contract ].
Moneys due or to become due under the contract described above have been assigned to the undersigned under the provisions of the Assignment of Claims Act of1940, as amended, ( 31 U.S.C.3727 , 41 U.S.C.6305 ).
A true copy of the instrument of assignment executed by the Contractor on ___________ [ Date ], is attached to the original notice.
Payments due or to become due under this contract should be made to the undersigned assignee.
Please return to the undersigned the three enclosed copies of this notice with appropriate notations showing the date and hour of receipt, and signed by the person acknowledging receipt on behalf of the addressee.
Very truly yours,
__________________________________________________ [ Name of Assignee ]
By _______________________________________________ [ Signature of Signing Officer ]
__________________________________________________ [ Titleof Signing Officer ]
__________________________________________________ [ Address of Assignee ]
Acknowledgement
Receipt is acknowledged of the above notice and of a copy of the instrument of assignment. They were received ____(a.m.) (p.m.) on ______, 20___.
__________________________________________________ [ Signature ]
__________________________________________________ [ Title ]
__________________________________________________ On behalf of
__________________________________________________ [ Name of Addressee of this Notice ]
(d) Examination by the Government. In examining and processing notices of assignment and before acknowledging their receipt, contracting officers should assure that the following conditions and any additional conditions specified in agency regulations, have been met:
(1) The contract has been properly approved and executed.
(2) The contract is one under which claims may be assigned.
(3) The assignment covers only money due or to become due under the contract.
(4) The assignee is registered separately in the System for Award Management unless one of the exceptions in 4.1102 applies.
(e) Release of assignment.
(1) A release of an assignment is required whenever-
(i) There has been a further assignment or reassignment under the Act; or
(ii) The contractor wishes to reestablish its right to receive further payments after the contractor’s obligations to the assignee have been satisfied and a balance remains due under the contract.
(2) The assignee, under a further assignment or reassignment, in order to establish a right to receive payment from the Government, must file with the addressees listed in 32.802 (e) a-
(i) Written notice of release of the contractor by the assigning financing institution;
(ii) Copy of the release instrument;
(iii) Written notice of the further assignment or reassignment; and
(iv) Copy of the further assignment or reassignment instrument.
(3) If the assignee releases the contractor from an assignment of claims under a contract, the contractor, in order to establish a right to receive payment of the balance due under the contract, must file a written notice of release together with a true copy of the release of assignment instrument with the addressees noted in 32.802 (e).
(4) The addressee of a notice of release of assignment or the official acting on behalf of that addressee shall acknowledge receipt of the notice.
(1) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.232-23 , Assignment of Claims , in solicitations and contracts expected to exceed the micro-purchase threshold , unless the contract will prohibit the assignment of claims (see 32.803 (b)). The use of the clause is not required for purchase orders . However, the clause may be used in purchase orders expected to exceed the micro-purchase threshold , that are accepted in writing by the contractor, if such use is consistent with agency policies and regulations.
(2) If a no-setoff commitment has been authorized (see 32.803 (d)), the contracting officer shall use the clause with its AlternateI.
(b) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.232-24 , Prohibition of Assignment of Claims , in solicitations and contracts for which a determination has been made under agency regulations that the prohibition of assignment of claims is in the Government’s interest.
Definitions
FAC Changes
Style Formatter
ACQUISITION.GOV
An official website of the General Services Administration
Robert Morris has resigned as senior pastor at Gateway Church in Southlake, Texas, three days after confessing to engaging in “sexual behavior” with a child over the course of a few years in the 1980s.
The board of elders at Gateway made the announcement Tuesday in a statement to NBC News.
“The elders’ prior understanding was that Morris’s extramarital relationship, which he had discussed many times throughout his ministry, was with ‘a young lady’ and not abuse of a 12-year-old child,” the church leaders said in their statement, noting that they had not known the victim’s age or the length of the alleged abuse. “Even though it occurred many years before Gateway was established, as leaders of the church, we regret that we did not have the information that we now have.”
The megachurch also announced it had hired the law firm Haynes & Boone to conduct an independent review of the allegations to ensure elders had a complete understanding of what happened.
Morris, a former member of President Donald Trump’s spiritual advisory committee, had long told a story to his congregation and church leaders about a “moral failure” involving sexual sin when he was a young minister in his 20s.
Last week, Cindy Clemishire, now 54, revealed in a post on the church watchdog site The Wartburg Watch that she was 12 when Morris first sexually abused her in 1982. The alleged abuse continued for more than four years, Clemishire told NBC News on Monday.
Gateway and Morris responded to Clemishire’s allegation by releasing statements on Friday and Saturday acknowledging that Morris had engaged in “sexual behavior with a young lady” and stating that the “sin was dealt with correctly by confession and repentance.”
Clemishire released a statement Tuesday saying she had “mixed feelings” about Morris’ resignation.
“Though I am grateful that he is no longer a pastor at Gateway, I am disappointed that the Board of Elders allowed him to resign,” she said in the statement. “He should have been terminated.”
Clemishire added that she had repeatedly disclosed the abuse to church leaders and pastors, including at Gateway, but it was not until she spoke publicly that action was taken.
Morris did not respond to a message requesting comment.
Gateway officials did not respond to a message from NBC News on Tuesday asking why church leaders issued a statement referring to Clemishire as a young lady after she’d publicly revealed she was a child when the abuse began.
Morris is known for his efforts to advance conservative Christian morality through government and Republican politics. As news of the allegations against him spread in national media, some of his allies have distanced themselves from him.
A spokesperson for Trump said Morris was not working with the presidential campaign. And Texas state Reps. Nate Schatzline and Giovanni Capriglione, both Republicans representing areas where Gateway has campuses, issued statements condemning Morris’ actions.
“Pastor Morris must be held accountable,” Capriglione wrote shortly before Morris’ resignation was announced. “The pain he has caused cannot be erased, and he should face the consequences of his crimes. I stand with any victims and will continue to fight for their rights and safety.”
In their official statement, Gateway elders expressed remorse over their handling of the situation.
“For the sake of the victim, we are thankful this situation has been exposed,” the statement said. “We know many have been affected by this, we understand that you are hurting, and we are very sorry. It is our prayer that, in time, healing for all those affected can occur.”
Mike Hixenbaugh is a senior investigative reporter for NBC News, based in Maryland, and author of "They Came for the Schools."
An official website of the United States government
Here’s how you know
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
View all Competition Matters Blog posts
We work to advance government policies that protect consumers and promote competition.
View Policy
Find legal resources and guidance to understand your business responsibilities and comply with the law.
Browse legal resources
Memo from Chair Lina M. Khan to commission staff and commissioners regarding the vision and priorities for the FTC.
Global perspectives from the international competition network tech forum.
View all Technology Blog posts
Learn more about your rights as a consumer and how to spot and avoid scams. Find the resources you need to understand how consumer protection law impacts your business.
Visit militaryconsumer.gov
Visit consumer.gov
Visit Competition Counts
Latest news, ftc issues annual report on refunds to consumers; agency returned $324m in 2023.
View News and Events
Seventeenth annual microeconomics conference.
View more Events
Sign up for the latest news
--> --> --> --> -->
Learn about the FTC's notable video game cases and what our agency is doing to keep the public safe.
Explore refund statistics including where refunds were sent and the dollar amounts refunded with this visualization.
Our mission is protecting the public from deceptive or unfair business practices and from unfair methods of competition through law enforcement, advocacy, research, and education.
Learn more about the FTC
Lina M. Khan was sworn in as Chair of the Federal Trade Commission on June 15, 2021.
Chair Lina M. Khan
Looking for legal documents or records? Search the Legal Library instead.
Today, the Commission issued a statement regarding its referral to the Department of Justice a complaint against TikTok, the successor to Musical.ly, and its parent company ByteDance Ltd.
The Commission vote authorizing the issuance of the statement was 3-0-2, with Commissioners Ferguson and Holyoak recused.
The Federal Trade Commission works to promote competition and protect and educate consumers . The FTC will never demand money, make threats, tell you to transfer money, or promise you a prize. Learn more about consumer topics at consumer.ftc.gov , or report fraud, scams, and bad business practices at ReportFraud.ftc.gov . Follow the FTC on social media , read consumer alerts and the business blog , and sign up to get the latest FTC news and alerts .
Media contact.
Douglas Farrar Office of Public Affairs 202-615-3782
South Australia's police commissioner has issued a statement which he says addresses factual inaccuracies over allegations of misconduct by a police inspector made in state parliament.
On Tuesday, independent MLC Frank Pangallo raised concerns in parliament about Inspector Wade Burns, who is the current deputy president of the Police Association of South Australia (PASA), regarding alleged "predatory behaviour" and the alleged sexual assault of a female police employee during a social function.
He told parliament Inspector Burns was the subject of complaints by colleagues in 2017 and was later demoted, but that Inspector Burns appealed and had his rank reinstated.
The comments by Mr Pangallo were made under parliamentary privilege.
In a statement on Friday, Commissioner Grant Stevens said after careful consideration he's satisfied it's a matter of public interest and he is obliged to correct the public record.
"Inspector Burns did not institute an appeal on grounds of his demotion. In 2020, (then) Senior Sergeant Burns lodged a Police Review Tribunal appeal, challenging a decision by a SAPOL Selection Advisory Committee not to promote him to the rank of Inspector. He was successful in his appeal and the tribunal ordered SAPOL to promote him to the rank of Inspector," Commissioner Stevens said.
Mr Pangallo also claimed that Inspector Burns had been appointed the head of Project Equitas, "a program designed to combat sexual discrimination, sexual harassment and predatory behaviour in SA Police, following the disturbing findings of a review by the Equal Opportunity Commissioner".
Commissioner Stevens said that was incorrect.
"Inspector Burns never held a position within Project Equitas," the commissioner wrote.
He said an internal criminal investigation into the 2017 allegations was not referred for prosecution on the wishes of the alleged victim.
"I can confirm that, upon receipt of the relevant allegations in 2017, SAPOL's Internal Investigation Section did commence a criminal investigation. Following the criminal investigation, after considering all relevant factors including, importantly, the wishes of the alleged victim, the matter was not referred for prosecution. Subsequently, a misconduct investigation was undertaken," Commissioner Stevens said.
Inspector Burns this week was reported to have denied it was a criminal matter but Commissioner Stevens said it was not dishonest as he may not know an investigation had started.
'worst-kept secret': allegations senior police officer sexually assaulted female colleague aired in parliament.
The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500
Since his first day in office, President Biden has called on Congress to secure our border and address our broken immigration system. As Congressional Republicans have continued to put partisan politics ahead of national security – twice voting against the toughest and fairest set of reforms in decades – the President and his Administration have taken actions to secure the border, including:
President Biden believes that securing the border is essential. He also believes in expanding lawful pathways and keeping families together, and that immigrants who have been in the United States for decades, paying taxes and contributing to their communities, are part of the social fabric of our country. The Day One immigration reform plan that the President sent to Congress reflects both the need for a secure border and protections for the long-term undocumented. While Congress has failed to act on these reforms, the Biden-Harris Administration has worked to strengthen our lawful immigration system. In addition to vigorously defending the DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood arrivals) policy, the Administration has extended Affordable Care Act coverage to DACA recipients and streamlined, expanded, and instituted new reunification programs so that families can stay together while they complete the immigration process. Still, there is more that we can do to bring peace of mind and stability to Americans living in mixed-status families as well as young people educated in this country, including Dreamers. That is why today, President Biden announced new actions for people who have been here many years to keep American families together and allow more young people to contribute to our economy. Keeping American Families Together
Easing the Visa Process for U.S. College Graduates, Including Dreamers
We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better.
Opt in to send and receive text messages from President Biden.
Code generation benchmarks such as HumanEval are widely adopted to evaluate LLMs' capabilities. However, after consolidating the latest 24 benchmarks, we noticed three significant imbalances. First, imbalanced programming language. 95.8% of benchmarks involve Python, while only 5 benchmarks involve Java. Second, imbalanced code granularity. Function-/statement-level benchmarks account for over 83.3% of benchmarks. Only a mere handful extends to class-/project-levels, and all are limited to Python. Third, lacking advanced features. Existing benchmarks primarily assess basic coding skills, while overlooking advanced Object-Oriented Programming (OOP) features (i.e., encapsulation, inheritance, and polymorphism). To fill these gaps, we propose JavaBench, a project-level Java benchmark that exercises OOP features. It comprises four Java projects with 389 methods in 106 Java classes. The test coverage is up to 92%, and JavaBench is attested by 282 undergraduate students, reaching a 90.93/100 average score (i.e., pass rate against the test suite), ensuring the quality of documentation, code skeleton, and tests. To better evaluate LLM's capability against JavaBench, we introduce a systematic evaluation design covering three context settings and five synthesis strategies at two granularities using three hierarchical metrics. Our extensive experiment yields several interesting findings. First, we noticed that regarding project-level Java programming, LLMs are far behind undergraduate students (no project can be correctly completed by any studied LLMs, and at most 41.17% Pass@5 in a more relaxed evaluation). Second, using method signature as prompt context may strike an ideal balance for project-level code generation. JavaBench is publicly available at https://github.com/java-bench/JavaBench.
“Subscription services are convenient, flexible and cost effective to allow users to choose the plan that best fits their needs, timeline and budget. Our priority is to always ensure our customers have a positive experience. We are transparent with the terms and conditions of our subscription agreements and have a simple cancellation process. We will refute the FTC’s claims in court.” - Dana Rao, General Counsel and Chief Trust Officer
Our goal: The best products & value
Our intention is to deliver the best products and the most value to our customers.Over a decade ago, as the world became more digital and more cloud-based, Adobe developed a subscription model to deliver more innovation, including many cloud-based features and services, more affordably to our customers. Just as consumers have subscriptions to access music, use productivity software, or use Adobe’s creative tools, subscription-based software and services unlock countless possibilities for collaborative and computationally-intensive features and are the heart of the multi-trillion dollar digital economy.
Why subscriptions are better
What our subscriptions provide
COMMENTS
What this handout is about. The first step in any successful college writing venture is reading the assignment. While this sounds like a simple task, it can be a tough one. This handout will help you unravel your assignment and begin to craft an effective response. Much of the following advice will involve translating typical assignment terms ...
Assignment Statement. An Assignment statement is a statement that is used to set a value to the variable name in a program. Assignment statement allows a variable to hold different types of values during its program lifespan. Another way of understanding an assignment statement is, it stores a value in the memory location which is denoted.
Dear Professor/Instructor [Last Name], I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to submit my assignment for the [Course Name]. The assignment is attached in the required format. I have completed the assignment as per the given guidelines and it is ready for submission. The due date for the assignment is [Due Date].
Argue - If an assignment asks you to make an argument, you need to take a stand on a topic and develop your claim to show why your position makes sense. There are many terms related to argument. For example, evaluate, critique, assess, and review may ask for an argument about the worth of a subject. Propose, recommend, and advise may ask for ...
In this lesson, you will learn about assignment statements and expressions that contain math operators and variables. 1.4.1. Assignment Statements ¶. Assignment statements initialize or change the value stored in a variable using the assignment operator =. An assignment statement always has a single variable on the left hand side.
1. Read the assignment carefully as soon as you receive it. Do not put this task off—reading the assignment at the beginning will save you time, stress, and problems later. An assignment can look pretty straightforward at first, particularly if the instructor has provided lots of information.
Determining the Purpose. The wording of an assignment should suggest its purpose. Any of the following might be expected of you in a college writing assignment: Summarizing information. Analyzing ideas and concepts. Taking a position and defending it. Combining ideas from several sources and creating your own original argument.
How to Read an Assignment. Assignments usually ask you to demonstrate that you have immersed yourself in the course material and that you've done some thinking on your own; questions not treated at length in class often serve as assignments. Fortunately, if you've put the time into getting to know the material, then you've almost certainly ...
So in the EWC we recommend that whenever you receive a writing assignment from a professor your first step should be to analyze it--preferably with input from us at the Effective Writing Center. In other words, let us help you break down the assignment and determine what the professor really wants so that you can be successful in the experience.
Understanding the question is the first and most important step when starting your assignments and helps to ensure that your research and writing is more focused and relevant. This means understanding both the individual words, and also the general scope of the question. A common mistake students make with their assignments is to misinterpret ...
One of the most important steps in writing an essay is constructing your working thesis statement. A thesis statement tells the reader the purpose, argument, or direction you will take to answer your assignment question. It is found in the introduction paragraph. The thesis statement: Directly relates to the task.
This page titled 2.1: Assignment statements is shared under a CC BY-NC 3.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Allen B. Downey (Green Tea Press) via source content that was edited to the style and standards of the LibreTexts platform; a detailed edit history is available upon request.
2.1 Plan Schedule your work on a particular assignment over a specific period, such a three weeks. Stick to the schedule. 2.2 Consult the prescribed study material- Tutorial letter 101, appropriate study guide and other relevant sources. 2.3 Study the instructions of the assignment and the guidelines- look at the type of an assignment.
As expression assignments can sometimes be used equivalently to statement assignments, the question of which should be preferred will arise. For the benefit of style guides such as PEP 8, two recommendations are suggested. If either assignment statements or assignment expressions can be used, prefer statements; they are a clear declaration of ...
Assignments: The Basic Law. The assignment of a right or obligation is a common contractual event under the law and the right to assign (or prohibition against assignments) is found in the majority of agreements, leases and business structural documents created in the United States. As with many terms commonly used, people are familiar with the ...
After creating your assignments, go back to your learning objectives and make sure there is still a good match between what you want students to learn and what you are asking them to do. If you find a mismatch, you will need to adjust either the assignments or the learning objectives. For instance, if your goal is for students to be able to ...
Assignment (law) Assignment [a] is a legal term used in the context of the laws of contract and of property. In both instances, assignment is the process whereby a person, the assignor, transfers rights or benefits to another, the assignee. [1] An assignment may not transfer a duty, burden or detriment without the express agreement of the assignee.
32.802 Conditions. Under the Assignment of Claims Act, a contractor may assign moneys due or to become due under a contract if all the following conditions are met: (a) The contract specifies payments aggregating $1,000 or more. (b) The assignment is made to a bank, trust company, or other financing institution, including any Federal lending ...
Which of the following statements is true regarding assignments and subleasing? A. Both assignment and subleasing allow the former tenant to relinquish liability for the lease payment. B. Both assignment and subleasing require specific written approval of the landlord C. Neither assignment nor subleasing relieve the former tenant of liability.
Which statement regarding assignments is accurate? Gratuitous assignments are generally revocable regardless of whether they are oral or written. An assignment for consideration is irrevocable. An assignment becomes valid when the obligor receives notice of the assignment. An assignment must be written and follow all legal formalities.
Which of the following statements are true? A) Every variable must be declared before it can be used. B) Every variable must be given an initial value. C) Variables can be used, even if they've not been declared, so long as they have an initial value. D) A variable may be re-declared, if desired, but it loses its current value when this is done.
Pastor Robert Morris had admitted to "inappropriate sexual behavior with a young lady." Church elders say they weren't told the age of the person involved.
Today, the Commission issued a statement regarding its referral to the Department of Justice a complaint against TikTok, the successor to Musical.ly, and its parent company ByteDance Ltd. The Commission vote authorizing the issuance of the statement was 3-0-2, with Commissioners Ferguson and Holyoak recused.
Acting Comptroller of the Currency Michael J. Hsu issued the following statement at today's Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) board meeting regarding the creation of the Office of Professional Conduct and the Office of Equal Employment Opportunity.
In short: South Australia's police commissioner has released a statement to "correct the public record" regarding comments made about Inspector Wade Burns. Independent MLC Frank Pangallo raised ...
Since his first day in office, President Biden has called on Congress to secure our border and address our broken immigration system. As Congressional Republicans have continued to put partisan ...
Which of the following statements is true regarding assignments and subleasing? A. Both assignment and subleasing allow the former tenant to relinquish liability for the lease payment. B. Both assignment and subleasing require specific written approval of the landlord C. Neither assignment nor subleasing relieve the former tenant of liability.
Code generation benchmarks such as HumanEval are widely adopted to evaluate LLMs' capabilities. However, after consolidating the latest 24 benchmarks, we noticed three significant imbalances. First, imbalanced programming language. 95.8% of benchmarks involve Python, while only 5 benchmarks involve Java. Second, imbalanced code granularity. Function-/statement-level benchmarks account for over ...
"Subscription services are convenient, flexible and cost effective to allow users to choose the plan that best fits their needs, timeline and budget. Our priority is to always ensure our customers have a positive experience. We are transparent with the terms and conditions of our subscription agreements and have a simple cancellation process. We will refute the FTC's claims in court ...
Acting Comptroller of the Currency Michael J. Hsu issued the following statement at today's Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) board meeting regarding the application from Thrivent Financial for federal deposit insurance.