Kenneth
W. Orce, Esq.
John
Schuster, Esq.
Cahill
Gordon & Reindel LLP
80
Pine Street
New
York, New York 10005
(212)
701-3000
|
Richard
D. Katcher, Esq.
Trevor
S. Norwitz, Esq.
Wachtell,
Lipton, Rosen & Katz
51
West 52nd Street
New
York, New York 10019-6150
(212)
403-1000
|
o |
Check
the box if the filing relates solely to preliminary communications
made
before the commencement of a tender
offer.
|
· |
replacing
in each instance, in the first sentence of the first paragraph under
“—(c)
Reasons for Rejection” and the first sentence of the second paragraph
under “—(c) Reasons for Rejection,” the word “factor” with the word
“reason.”
|
· |
adding
the following to the end of sub-paragraph (i) under “—(c) Reasons for
Rejection”: “In making its determination that the Company, on a
stand-alone basis, should provide greater value to stockholders than
the
Offer, the Board considered the reasons set forth below in this Schedule
14D-9 for reaching its conclusion that the Offer was inadequate. In
making
its determination that the Company, on a combined basis with Stone,
should
provide greater value to stockholders than the Offer, the Board considered
the analyses of the financial advisors regarding the Stone transaction,
as
set forth in the Registration Statement, and its familiarity with the
proposed combination of EPL with Stone.”
|
· |
deleting
the third paragraph under “—(c) Reasons for Rejection” and replacing it
with the following: “The foregoing discussion of the information and
reasons considered by the Board is not intended to be exhaustive but
addresses the material information and all material reasons considered
by
the Board in its consideration of the Offer. In view of the variety
of
reasons and the amount of information considered, the Board did not
find
it practicable to provide specific assessments of, quantify or otherwise
assign any relative weights to, the specific reasons considered in
determining to recommend that stockholders reject the Offer. Such
determination was made after consideration of all the reasons taken
as a
whole. In addition, individual members of the Board may have given
differing weights to different reasons. Throughout its deliberations,
the
Board consulted with the Company’s financial and legal advisors, who were
retained to advise the Board in connection with the
Offer.”
|
Energy
Partners, Ltd.
|
By:
/s/
John H. Peper
|
Name: John H. Peper
|
Title: Executive Vice President, General
|
Counsel and Corporate Secretary
|