Re: FW: NDA ,
 Jake -

The Cargill changes are acceptable except for (1) the deletion of the 
non-solicitation provisions and (2) the change back to Minnesota law.  The 
non-solicitation provision is a business call and relates to the disclosures 
being made and individuals involved in the project.  If Cargill will have 
contact with key EOL IT personnel, the non-solicitation should be part of the 
agreement.  As to the change of law, we cannot accept Minnesota and must have 
New York as this is a neutral forum.

Mark
Senior Counsel, EWS
Phone:     713-345-8897
Facsimile: 713-646-3490
E-Mail:      Mark.Greenberg@enron.com



	Jake Staffel/ENRON@enronXgate
	05/17/2001 01:44 PM
		 
		 To: Mark Greenberg/NA/Enron@ENRON
		 cc: 
		 Subject: FW: NDA


Mark,

Here is the revised Cargill NDA
 -----Original Message-----
From:  Anne_Pedrero@cargill.com@ENRON 
[mailto:IMCEANOTES-Anne+5FPedrero+40cargill+2Ecom+40ENRON@ENRON.com] 
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 12:57 PM
To: Staffel, Jake
Cc: Richard_Mack@cargill.com
Subject: NDA

Attached is a revised NDA with just a few changes. Please let us know
if this works for you.

Thanks!

Anne

_________________________________________
Anne Pedrero
Cargill eVentures
1500 Fashion Island Boulevard, Suite 209
San Mateo, CA 94404
(650)356-7064
anne_pedrero@cargill.com
http://www.cargilleventures.com


 - ENRON CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT2.DOC
jake.staffel@enron.com