Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): if “(a) Attendance is outside of the employee’s regular working hours; (b) Attendance is in fact voluntary; (c) The course, lecture, or meeting is not directly related to the employee’s job; and (d) The employee does not perform any productive work during such attendance.” 29 C.F.R. § 785.27; see also Wolman, 2010 WL 5491182, at *3. Here, Wolman and Lundy have asserted facts sufficient to state a claim that the monthly, mandatory staff meetings were compensable. However, the Court finds that Wolman failed to assert facts sufficient to state a claim that the ten hours of respiratory therapy credits were compensable: The FAC does not state where or when these credits were obtained or if they were mandatory. See, e.g., Price v. Tampa Elec. Co., 806 F.2d 1551, 1551-52 (11th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>). b. In Excess of W Hours per Week To survive a 
 Holding statements: (A) recognizing that employee would have to be the rainman to be able to retain recall and make use of information contained in documents with which he worked while employed by defendant where he did not take those documents with him when he left (B) holding that meterman was not entitled to compensation for time spent taking a course to advance to a higher paying job classification because his employer did not require him to take the course and he would have remained a meterman with the same responsibilities and credits had he chosen not to take the course (C) holding that the lack of a confidentiality agreement does not necessarily defeat an argument that information is a trade secret because where an employee acquires during the course of his employment a special technique or process developed by his employer he is under a duty not to use it to the detriment of his employer (D) holding that the phrase  to  be taken is of course a future tense of the verb take (E) holding that while safety improvements to public golf course were both feasible and highly desirable the citys failure to take such steps did not create a dangerous condition on the golf course for purposes of the cgia
Output (English): holding that while safety improvements to public golf course were both feasible and highly desirable the citys failure to take such steps did not create a dangerous condition on the golf course for purposes of the cgia