flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: recidivism. Cruz indeed has a substantial criminal history, including two felony narcotics offenses, an illegal reentry offense, an identity theft offense, and a bail jumping offense. Further, Cruz’s bail jumping enabled him to escape prosecution for an additional charge of passport fraud. After jumping bail on that charge, Cruz remained a fugitive for four years, during which time the government failed to preserve the evidence against him and could no longer pursue its case. Given Cruz’s repeated transgressions, the District Court acted within its allowable discretion in determining that a bottom-end Guidelines sentence was necessary to promote general and specific deterrence and respect for the law. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a); United States v. Fernandez, 443 F.3d 19, 27 (2d Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>); see also id. (noting that in conducting our Options: A. recognizing that in the overwhelming majority of cases a guidelines sentence will fall comfortably within the broad range of sentences that would be reasonable in the particular circumstances B. holding that a sentence within a properly calculated guidelines range is presumptively reasonable C. holding that the defendants sentence was within the guidelines range and therefore presumptively reasonable D. holding that sentences within the guideline range are presumptively reasonable E. holding a sentence within the advisory guidelines range is presumptively reasonable

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that in the overwhelming majority of cases a guidelines sentence will fall comfortably within the broad range of sentences that would be reasonable in the particular circumstances
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you become aware , or suspect for any reason , that the security of your log-in details has been compromised , please let us know here as soon as you can .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that I should wear my dust mask or respirator after I mixed [and sprayed] the product, [when] I could see little, if any, dust in the air.”). Mr. Headley’s declaration answers this question by stating that, were such information given, he would have worn the dust mask/respirator for the entire day, rather than the usual five hours per day he usually wore it. Dkt. No. 78 at 2, ¶ 3 (Headley Deck). At the very least, genuine factual disputes exist regarding whether Mr. Headley knew, or was ever made properly aware by Ferro, that breathing silica was possible even when the air appeared clear, as well as whether a warning indicating as much would have affected his safety decisions. See, e.g., Ayers v. Johnson & Johnson Baby Prods. Co., 117 Wash.2d 747, 755-756, 818 P.2d 1337, 1341 (1991) (<HOLDING>). 3. Summary Judgment Is Improper on the Options: A. holding that defendants had no standing where they conceded that they did not own the automobile searched and were simply passengers the owner of the car had been the driver of the vehicle at the time of the search B. holding that plaintiffs contention that had they been warned of the dangers of aspirating baby oil the accident would have been avoided satisfied the requirements of rcw 7720301b C. holding that where a witness had been convicted seventeen years earlier but had been given probation and had not been confined the date of the conviction controlled D. holding admissible certain evidence which would not have been obtained but for violations of constitutional requirements E. holding that even in separate trial other crimes evidence would not have been admissible and identification testimony would have been admissible

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that plaintiffs contention that had they been warned of the dangers of aspirating baby oil the accident would have been avoided satisfied the requirements of rcw 7720301b
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: all pictures , graphics , videos , and other visual media displayed on the vimeo service are exempt from 18 u.s.c. § 2257 and 28 c.f.r. 75 because they do not consist of depictions of conduct as specifically listed in 18 u.s.c. § 2256 ( 2 ) ( a ) - ( d ) , but are merely , at most , depictions of non-sexually explicit nudity , or are depictions of simulated sexual conduct , or are otherwise exempt because the visual depictions were created prior to july 3 , 1995 .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: repetition of such conduct or comparable conduct by others similarly situated. Id. at 44-45, 111 S.Ct. 2123; Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of Am. v. Energy Gathering Inc., 86 F.3d 464, 467 (5th Cir.1996) (noting that the inherent authority to impose sanctions may only be exercised if essential to preserve the authority of the court and that the sanction imposed must employ the least possible power adequate to achieve its purpose). A court may assess attorneys’ fees as a sanction when a party has “acted in bad faith, vexatiously, wantonly, or for oppressive reasons” in either instituting or conducting litigation. Chambers, 501 U.S. at 45-46, 111 S.Ct. 2123 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted); Citizens Bank & Trust Co. v. Case (In re Case), 937 F.2d 1014, 1023 (5th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Courts generally evaluate the fees requested Options: A. recognizing power of bankruptcy court under 105 of the code and bankruptcy rule 9020 to impose contempt sanctions for violations of automatic stay B. holding that bankruptcy courts have inherent power to sanction and affirming sanctions imposed by bankruptcy court against a nonparty C. recognizing power of bankruptcy court to impose sanctions on parties and counsel who willfully abuse the judicial process but not finding sanctions appropriate against debtor and his attorney for their repeated bankruptcy filings D. holding that bankruptcy court may issue proposed findings and conclusions in a core proceeding over which the bankruptcy court does not have constitutional authority E. holding that the bankruptcy court has the inherent power to award sanctions for badfaith conduct in a bankruptcy court proceeding

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the bankruptcy court has the inherent power to award sanctions for badfaith conduct in a bankruptcy court proceeding
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Borrower shall keep accurate and complete records of its Accounts, including all payments and collections thereon, and shall submit to the Administrative Agent sales, collection, reconciliation and other reports in form satisfactory to the Administrative Agent on a periodic basis (but not more frequently than at the time of delivery of each of the financials required pursuant to Section 5.04(a) and (b) ). Each Borrower shall also provide to the Administrative Agent, on or before the 20th day of each month, a detailed aged trial balance of all Accounts as of the end of the preceding month, specifying each Account’s Account Debtor name and the amount, invoice date and due date as the Administrative Agent may reasonably request. If Accounts owing from any single Account Debtor in an aggregate face amount of $5,000,000 or more cease to be Eligible Accounts, the Borrowers shall notify the Administrative Agent of such occurrence promptly (and in any event within three Business Days) after any Responsible Officer of the Lead Borrower has actual knowledge thereof.

assistant: Records
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Borrower will, and will cause each Subsidiary to, timely file complete and correct material United States federal and applicable foreign, state and local tax returns required by law and pay when due all material taxes, assessments and governmental charges and levies upon it or its income, profits or Property, except those that are being contested in good faith by appropriate proceedings with respect to which adequate reserves have been set aside in accordance with GAAP and that could not reasonably be expected, individually or in the aggregate, to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Taxes
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a motion for mistrial where detective testified with regard to a third party’s statement that the defendant had delivered cocaine because there was "no evidence the government knowingly presented false or materially misleading evidence” and defendant was not prejudiced.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 986, 117 L.Ed.2d 148 (1992); United States v. Rodriguez, 929 F.2d 1224, 1228 (7th Cir.1991) (noting that no error was committed where a testifying officer inadvertently blurted that the defendant "had previously been arrested for participating in a heroin transaction” because the trial court sustained defense counsel’s objection, struck the testimony, and instructed the jury to disregard any mention of the arrest.); United States v. Hoelscher, 914 F.2d 1527, 1535-36 (8th Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1090, 111 S.Ct. 971, Options: A. holding that no error was committed where issue of whether the defendant had committed another crime was injected into the trial by the codefendant but was immediately followed by the trial courts instructions to the jury that only the counts listed on the indictment be considered B. holding that reversible error was committed when the court could not determine that the instruction given by the trial justice was sufficient to remove the taint of the statement and such doubt was to be resolved in favor of the defendant C. holding that whether the tortious act was committed during the time the employee was on duty and whether the tortious act was committed while the employee was on the employers premises were both factors weighing in favor of finding the activity within the scope of employment D. holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to accept the defendants guilty pleas to two counts of the indictment and stating that even if the trial court erred the error had not prejudiced the defendant because he was found guilty by the jury of the charges to which he intended to plead and the evidence of the other crimes would have been admissible in the trial for the first degree murder charge E. holding that the defendant was denied due process because the procedural rule was not followed in any respect by the trial court

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that no error was committed where issue of whether the defendant had committed another crime was injected into the trial by the codefendant but was immediately followed by the trial courts instructions to the jury that only the counts listed on the indictment be considered
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: about whether a fiduciary’s silence, rather than active concealment, can constitute a misrepresentation. See Krawczyk v. Harnischfeger Corp., 869 F.Supp. 613, 628 (E.D.Wis.1995) aff'd 41 F.3d 276 (7th Cir.1994). In this case, however, Adams not only received an enrollment form but was sent a statement confirming her enrollment, received benefits under the Tetra Flex plan for which she was supposedly ineligible and paid premiums to the same for a period of at least four or five months. A recent case in this jurisdiction has determined that facts similar to these are sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss premised on defendants’ lack of misrepresentation. See The Estate of Cencula v. John Alden Life Insurance Company, 1998 WL 719937, *4 (N.D.Ill., October 6, 1998) (Slip Opinion) (<HOLDING>). The Cencula court acknowledged that, in Options: A. holding that plan administrator of an erisa health plan did not have to anticipate the confusion of a plan participant B. holding administrative program shown where employer endorsed plan in company booklet referring to it as our plan employed fulltime plan administrator collected payments from employees and remitted payments to insurer C. holding that a payment is under the plan when the debt is provided for in the plan D. holding that erisa employee benefits plan was subrogated to all claims by covered individual against third party for all payments made by the plan E. holding that a finding of estoppel by conduct under erisa might be appropriate where the insured received a letter welcoming her to the plan received more than seventynine payments under plan for 60000 in medical bills and paid plan premium payments for a tenmonth period before being notified of ineligibility due to preexisting condition

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a finding of estoppel by conduct under erisa might be appropriate where the insured received a letter welcoming her to the plan received more than seventynine payments under plan for 60000 in medical bills and paid plan premium payments for a tenmonth period before being notified of ineligibility due to preexisting condition
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you and onavo agree that each may bring disputes against the other only on your or its own behalf , and not on behalf of any government official or other person , or any class of people .

assistant: None
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that the defendant’s right to a fair trial is prejudiced. See Masaka, 4 So.3d at 1286; Wells, 967 So.2d at 419. In the instant case, there was no evidence offered that Appellant worked in conjunction with anyone else to commit the crimes. Such a theory was never argued before the jury, and the instruction on principals was neither requested by the State nor read in the original reading of the jury instructions. The instruction was only given after the jury presented the court with a question regarding its inability to determine whether Appellant was the actual shooter. Where there was no evidence offered that Appellant acted with anyone in committing the shootings, the trial court erred in reading the principals instruction. See Lovette v. State, 654 So.2d 604, 606 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (<HOLDING>). Further, the error was not harmless in that Options: A. holding that instructing the jury on a legal duty theory when appellant had no legal duty to prevent the commission of the offense was error B. holding that trial court committed reversible error in not instructing jury to determine credibility of incriminating statements attributed to defendant by state trooper C. holding that the trial court committed reversible error in instructing the jury on a principals theory because there was no evidence that the appellant acted in concert with anyone in committing the charged offenses D. holding that there is no error in instructing the jury on alternative theories if there is sufficient evidence that the defendant committed firstdegree murder E. holding that the trial court committed fundamental error in not instructing the jury on the knowledge element of the offense of resisting an officer without violence when that element was in dispute at trial

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the trial court committed reversible error in instructing the jury on a principals theory because there was no evidence that the appellant acted in concert with anyone in committing the charged offenses
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: failed, however, to provide any reasoning for why it had “no trouble” reaching this conclusion. Instead, the court simply asserted: The State’s interest in protecting privacy is directly advanced when the State no longer allows access to the names and addresses of those charged with misdemeanor traffic violations and [Driving Under the Influence]. Further, refusing access to such information reasonably directly advances the State’s interest in lessening the danger of overreaching by solicitors where potential solicitation recipients may be particularly vulnerable. Id. We agree with the district court’s decision not to follow Lanphere. As the Ninth Circuit recently observed: “Lanphere fails to take into account the Supreme Court’s decision in Edenfield, 507 U.S. at 767, 113 S.Ct. 1792 (<HOLDING>), and is in conflict with Coors Brewing, 514 Options: A. holding that the third prong of centralhudson requires the challenged regulation to advance the state interests in a direct and material way not merely a direct or reasonably1 direct way B. holding that the complete denial of counsel on direct appeal requires a finding of prejudice C. holding claims must be raised on direct appeal or waived D. holding that circumstantial evidence was sufficient to show that a method step was carried out by the direct infringer even in the absence of direct evidence for direct infringer E. holding that direct evidence of defendants dna found at the scene was direct evidence merely of a circumstance that suggested his participation in the burglary and theft but was not direct evidence of his participation in the burglary

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the third prong of centralhudson requires the challenged regulation to advance the state interests in a direct and material way not merely a direct or reasonably1 direct way
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Waggoner represents and warrants to the Company that neither his entry into this Agreement nor his performance of his obligations hereunder will conflict with or result in a breach of the terms, conditions or provisions of any other agreement or obligation to which Waggoner is a party or by which Waggoner is bound, including, without limitation, any non-competition or confidentiality agreement previously entered into by Waggoner.

assistant: No Conflicts
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and 2005, amounted to vexatious litigation. On September 4, 2007, the trial court issued a final summary judgment in favor of the defendants, and this appeal followed. The defendants contend that the trial court’s final summary judgment should be affirmed because res judicata bars Jenkins’ arguments. We agree. The doctrine of res judicata bars re-litigation of a cause of action for claims that were raised and could have been raised in a prior action. The elements under the doctrine are: (1) identity of the things sued for; (2) identity of the cause of action; (3) identity of the parties and (4) identity of the quality in the person for or against whom the claims are made. Johnson v. Young, 964 So.2d 719, 721 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); see also Topps v. State, 865 So.2d 1253, 1255 (Fla.2004) (<HOLDING>). The record clearly indicates that Jenkins’ Options: A. holding that a dismissal on statute of limitations grounds is an adjudication on the merits for purposes of res judicata B. holding that application of res judicata requires that a prior adjudication include a ruling on the merits C. holding that an adjudication on summary judgment is an adjudication on the merits D. holding that under federal law the dismissal of a claim as timebarred is adjudication of merits for purposes of res judicata E. holding that prior dismissal for lack of standing was not an adjudication on the merits under language identical to rule 1420b subsequent suit not barred by res judicata

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that application of res judicata requires that a prior adjudication include a ruling on the merits
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: has ever visited him to discuss his case; and that (4) he informed his lead counsel to withdraw his appeal. As we stated earlier, the record directly contradicts each of these claims. Thus, the State’s assertion that these letters establish Mr. Comer’s competence and obviate the need for a hearing is meritless. We also reject the State’s argument that, in deciding whether a hearing is necessary, we should presume that Mr. Comer is competent to waive further federal review based on a state court’s determination, thirteen years ago, that he was competent to stand trial. To be sure, a state court’s determination on competency to waive further legal remedies may trigger a presumption of correctness. See Demosthenes v. Baal, 495 U.S. 731, 734-35, 110 S.Ct. 2223, 109 L.Ed.2d 762 (1990) (<HOLDING>). But the presumption does not apply here Options: A. holding state rule barring review of postconviction petitioners claims where petitioner failed to provide supporting documentation is adequate procedural ground on which to bar federal habeas review B. holding that state courts determination that the petitioner was competent to waive his right to pursue further postconviction review of his claims was a factual one and therefore presumed correct under the federal habeas corpus statute C. holding that a habeas petitioner was not entitled to relief from a state courts determination that he had forfeited his right to counsel by physically assaulting his attorney and threatening to put a contract on his attorneys life D. holding that habeas petitioner scheduled to be executed in the state of virginia for capital murder could not raise claim of violation of his rights under the vienna convention on federal habeas review where he failed to preserve the claim by raising it in state court proceedings vienna convention does not trump subsequent federal statute requiring habeas petitioners who claim to be held in violation of treaties of the united states to develop factual bases for their claims in state court as a precondition of federal habeas review E. holding that a prisoners failure to pursue an appeal in state court is a procedural bar to federal habeas relief unless the petitioner shows both cause for failing to bring the state claim and actual prejudice from the failure to consider his federal claims

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that state courts determination that the petitioner was competent to waive his right to pursue further postconviction review of his claims was a factual one and therefore presumed correct under the federal habeas corpus statute
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: judgment in accordance with Rule 56, a party opposing the motion may not rest upon the allegations or denials of its pleadings; rather, the nonmovant must “set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.” Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. at 256, 106 S.Ct. 2505; Krenik v. County of Le Sueur, 47 F.3d 953, 957 (8th Cir.1995). Accordingly, the nonmovant “must make a sufficient showing on every essential element of its case for which it has the burden of proof at trial.” Wilson v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 55 F.3d 399, 405 (8th Cir.1995). II. Cause of Death To establish Bieffe’s liability for the alleged defect in the BF85, plaintiff must prove that the defect probably, or more likely than not, caused the injury. See, e.g., Walton v. Jones, 286 N.W.2d 710, 715 (Minn.1979) (<HOLDING>); Block v. Target Stores, Inc., 458 N.W.2d 705, Options: A. holding that the victims negligence is not a defense to criminal conduct B. holding that discovery rule applied to wrongful death action predicated on medical malpractice C. holding that testimony taken as a whole must establish reasonable medical certainty that the negligence caused the injuries at issue D. holding that in negligence actions florida courts follow the more likely than not standard of causation ie they require proof that the negligence probably caused the plaintiffs injury E. holding in the medical malpractice context that a plaintiff must prove that the alleged negligence more likely than not caused the victims death

assistant: The best answer is E. holding in the medical malpractice context that a plaintiff must prove that the alleged negligence more likely than not caused the victims death
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Fourth Amendment may be executed by one or more of the parties hereto in any number of separate counterparts, and all of such counterparts taken together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery of this Fourth Amendment by facsimile or electronic (e.g. pdf) transmission shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed original counterpart hereof.

assistant: Counterparts
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between you and the Company. This Agreement supersedes any previous agreements or understandings between you and the Company, except the CIIA and any other obligations specifically preserved in this Agreement.

assistant: Entire Agreements
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During and after Executive’s employment, Executive shall fully cooperate with the reasonable requests of the Bank, including providing information, with regard to any matter that the Executive has knowledge of as a result of the Executive’s employment or prior employment with the Bank. Executive further agrees to comply with any reasonable request by the Bank to assist in relation to any investigation into any actual or potential irregularities, including without limitation assisting with any threatened or actual litigation concerning the Bank, giving statements/affidavits, meeting with legal and/or other professional advisors, and attending any legal hearing and giving evidence; provided that the Bank shall reimburse the Executive for any reasonable out-of-pocket expenses properly incurred by the Executive in giving such assistance. Executive agrees to notify the Bank immediately if the Executive is contacted by any third parties for information or assistance with any matter concerning the Bank and agrees to co-operate the Bank with regard to responding to such requests.

assistant: Cooperation
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Release shall not be altered, amended, or modified except by written instrument executed by the Company and the Executive. A waiver of any portion of this Release shall not be deemed a waiver of any other portion of this Release.

assistant: Amendments
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The number of shares and type of all authorized, issued and outstanding capital stock, options and other securities of the Company as of March 31, 2019 (whether then convertible into or exercisable or exchangeable for shares of capital stock of the Company) is set forth in Schedule 3.1(g) hereto. Except as set forth in Schedule 3.1(g) , no Person has any right of first refusal, preemptive right, right of participation, or any similar right to participate in the transactions contemplated by the Transaction Documents that have not been effectively waived as of the Closing Date. Except as set forth in Schedule 3.1(g) , the issuance and sale of the Shares and the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, including by Section 4.13 and Article VI , will not obligate the Company to issue shares of Common Stock or other securities to any Person (other than the Purchasers) and will not result in a right of any holder of Company securities to adjust the exercise, conversion, exchange or reset price under any of such securities. The Company has not issued any capital stock since its most recently filed periodic report under the Exchange Act, other than pursuant to the exercise of employee stock options under the Company’s stock option plans and pursuant to the conversion and/or exercise of Common Stock Equivalents outstanding as of the date of the most recently filed periodic report under the Exchange Act. All of the outstanding shares of capital stock of the Company are validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable, have been issued in compliance with all applicable federal and state securities laws, and none of such outstanding shares was issued in violation of any preemptive rights or similar rights to subscribe for or purchase securities. No further approval or authorization of any stockholder, the Board of Directors or others is required for the issuance and sale of the Shares.

assistant: Capitalization
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No approval, consent, exemption, authorization or other action by, notice to, or filing with, any Governmental Authority or any stockholder, is necessary or required for (i) the grant by such Grantor of the security interest in the Collateral granted hereby (to the extent that such interest may be granted under the UCC) or for the execution, delivery or performance of this Agreement by such Grantor, (ii) the perfection of such security interest (to the extent such security interest can be perfected by filing under the UCC, the granting of control (to the extent required under Section 4(c) hereof) or by filing an appropriate notice with the USPTO or the United States Copyright Office) or (iii) subject to applicable law, the exercise by the Lender or the Secured Parties of the rights and remedies provided for in this Agreement (including, without limitation, as against any Issuer), except for (A) the filing or recording of UCC financing statements or other filings under the Assignment of Claims Act, (B) the filing of appropriate notices with the USPTO and the United States Copyright Office, (C) obtaining control to perfect the Liens created by this Agreement (to the extent required under Section 4(c) hereof), (D) such actions as may be required by Laws affecting the offering and sale of securities, (E) such actions as may be required by applicable foreign Laws affecting the pledge of the Pledged Equity of Foreign Subsidiaries, (F) consents, authorizations, filings or other actions which have been obtained or made, (G) as may be required with respect to Vehicles registered under a certificate of title and (H) as may be required under the Federal Assignment of Claims Act.

assistant: Consents
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: they filed this action. The Court finds that the plain language of § 1997e(e) is particularly clear—its limitation is confined to “prisoners confined in a jail, prison, or other correctional facility.” Certainly, if Congress intended to extend the reach of this section to cover inmates who have been released from incarceration, it would have chosen language indicating so. As the Second Circuit held when interpreting the exact same language in a different section of the PLRA: “[t]he reference to a prisoner’s ‘confine [merit in] any jail, prison, or other correctional facility’ thus seems to describe the status of a plaintiff at the time of filing, not that of the plaintiff at some later time.” Perez v. Westchester Cnty. Dep’t of Corrs., 587 F.3d 143, 155 (2d Cir.2009) (emphasis added) (<HOLDING>). That the district court in In re Nassau Cnty. Options: A. holding that 42 usc 1997ea requires prisoners to exhaust a process and not a remedy B. holding that 42 usc 1997edls attorney fee cap only applies to prisoners still incarcerated at the time of their cases resolution C. holding that a state is not a person under 42 usc 1983 D. holding that the plra only applies to plaintiffs who are incarcerated at the time an action is commenced E. recognizing right of prisoners to seek relief under 42 usc 1983 for denial of access to the courts

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that 42 usc 1997edls attorney fee cap only applies to prisoners still incarcerated at the time of their cases resolution
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any provision of this Agreement is held to be illegal, invalid or unenforceable, (a) the legality, validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected or impaired thereby and (b) the parties shall endeavor in good faith negotiations to replace the illegal, invalid or unenforceable provisions with valid provisions the economic effect of which comes as close as possible to that of the illegal, invalid or unenforceable provisions. The invalidity of a provision in a particular jurisdiction shall not invalidate or render unenforceable such provision in any other jurisdiction. Without limiting the foregoing provisions of this Section 8.10 , if and to the extent that the enforceability of any provisions in this Agreement relating to Defaulting Lenders shall be limited by any debtor relief laws, then such provisions shall be deemed to be in effect only to the extent not so limited.

assistant: Severability
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, for all purposes, shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware without regard to conflicts of law principles. Any action or proceeding by either of the parties to enforce this Agreement shall be brought only in a state or federal court located in the State of Delaware. The parties hereby irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of such courts and waive the defense of inconvenient forum to the maintenance of any such action or proceeding in such venue.

assistant: Venues
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Employment Period, the Executive hereby grants to the Company the right to use, in a reasonable and appropriate manner, the Executive’s name and likeness, without additional consideration, on, in and in connection with technical, marketing or disclosure materials, or any combination thereof, published by or for the Company or any Company Affiliate, and any documents or other matters to the extent legally required. If, in connection with the Executive’s termination of employment with the Company, the Company determines to issue a press release, the Company agrees to consult with the Executive in good faith as to the wording of the press release.

assistant: Publicity
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: It is generally considered an abuse of discretion to permit counsel “to ‘stake out’ a prospective juror in advance regarding what his decision might be under certain specific factual scenarios . . . .” State v. Jaynes, 353 N.C. 534, 549, 549 S.E.2d 179, 192 (2001), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 934, 152 L. Ed. 2d 220 (2002). The question presented to the potential jurors in this case was not directed at discerning whether the potential jurors would believe Wilds in spite of his having agreed to a plea bargain, but whether the jurors would be able to consider his testimony notwithstanding his having agreed to a plea bargain. This question is proper as it is directed at the potential juror’s ability to be fair and impartial. See State v. Conner, 335 N.C. 618, 644, 440 S.E.2d 826, 841 (1994) (<HOLDING>). Next, defendant argues the trial court erred Options: A. holding trial court did not err by refusing to allow counsel to question potential jurors on personal exposure to sexual assault and instead asking all jurors a general question about fairness and impartiality in a sexual assault case B. holding that the trial court did not err by allowing the prosecution to question prospective jurors regarding their ability to announce a death sentence in an appropriate case C. holding that the obligation to pay unallocated support would automatically terminate upon the recipients death D. holding that questions by defense counsel as to whether prospective jurors would be able to consider a life sentence in a particular case or would automatically vote for death upon conviction were proper to discern impartiality and fairness E. holding that the trial court did not err by refusing to ask whether prospective jurors would place a greater amount of weight upon the testimony of law enforcement officers over that of the defendants

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that questions by defense counsel as to whether prospective jurors would be able to consider a life sentence in a particular case or would automatically vote for death upon conviction were proper to discern impartiality and fairness
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Loan Party shall comply with all Applicable Laws with respect to the Collateral or any part thereof or to the operation of such Loan Party’s business the non-compliance with which could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect. The assets of the Loan Parties at all times shall be maintained in accordance with the requirements of all insurance carriers which provide insurance with respect to the assets of the Loan Parties so that such insurance shall remain in full force and effect.

assistant: Compliance With Laws
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: appropriate relief for such a violation is for the habeas court to “vacate the judgment of conviction and enter a new judgment from which an appeal can be taken.” Id. Defendant argues that the Peak line of eases applies to his situation, and that his appellate rights should thus be reinstated. However, the Peak rule does not apply in defendant’s ease, as the appeal at issue is not an appeal from a conviction. A Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not attach to an appeal from a supervised release revocation hearing. Borrego v. United States, 975 F.Supp. 520, 523 (S.D.N.Y.1997). This follows logically from the fact that there is no guaranteed constitutional right to counsel at the supervised release revocation hearing itself. See United States v. Meeks, 25 F.3d 1117, 1123 (2d Cir.1994)(<HOLDING>); see also United States v. Pelensky, 129 F.3d Options: A. holding that defendants have a right to counsel in criminal proceedings B. recognizing the right to trial by jury is a constitutional right to be given the same protections as other constitutional rights C. recognizing constitutional right to effective counsel D. holding that a defendant has a constitutional right to counsel as a matter of right on direct appeal E. holding that most of the fundamental constitutional procedural protections that are normally applicable to a criminal prosecution are not required for supervisedrelease proceedings as a matter of constitutional law including a right to counsel

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that most of the fundamental constitutional procedural protections that are normally applicable to a criminal prosecution are not required for supervisedrelease proceedings as a matter of constitutional law including a right to counsel
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Although the Guarantors party hereto have been informed of the matters set forth herein and have agreed to the same, each such Guarantor understands, acknowledges and agrees that none of the Secured Parties has any obligations to inform such Guarantor of such matters in the future or to seek such Guarantor’s acknowledgment or agreement to future amendments, restatements, supplements, changes, modifications, waivers or consents, and nothing herein shall create such a duty.

assistant: Agreements
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Guarantor irrevocably and unconditionally jointly and severally agrees with the Agent, each Lender and each Holder that if any obligation guaranteed by it is or becomes unenforceable, invalid or illegal, it will, as an independent and primary obligation, indemnify the Agent, such Lender and/or such Holder, as applicable, immediately on demand against any cost, loss or liability it incurs as a result of the Borrower or Guarantor not paying any amount which would, but for such unenforceability, invalidity or illegality, have been payable by it under any Transaction Document on the date when it would have been due. The amount payable by a Guarantor under this indemnity will not exceed the amount it would have had to pay under this Article 9 if the amount claimed had been recoverable on the basis of a guarantee.

assistant: Indemnity
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each Supplement H-4 Participant became a Participant in the Plan on the Merger Date, and shall continue as a Participant in the Plan until all of the Participant’s vested account balances are distributed, subject to the terms and conditions of the Plan and this Supplement H-4.

assistant: Participations
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: a competitive injury and those without it do not. Because the majority’s construction of the PSA avoids this straightforward conclusion only by reading absent terms into the statute, it should be rejected. The district court correctly held that the language of § 192(a) and (b) is plain, clear, and unambiguous, and that it does not require the Growers to prove an adverse effect on competition. Because § 192(a) and (b) plainly, clearly, and unambiguously do not require an adverse effect on competition, I would so hold and go no further. See Cooper Indus., Inc. v. Aviall Servs., Inc., 543 U.S. 157, 167, 125 S.Ct. 577, 160 L.Ed.2d 548 (2004) (“Given the clear meaning of the text, there is no need to ... consult the purpose of [the statute] at all.”); Lamie, 540 U.S. at 534, 124 S.Ct. 1023 (<HOLDING>); Rogers, 513 F.3d at 225-26 (citing Carrieri Options: A. holding that we may consult legislative history as an aid to the interpretation of ambiguous text B. recognizing longstanding precedents that permit resort to legislative history only when necessary to interpret ambiguous statutory text C. holding that even where there are contrary indications in the statutes legislative history we do not resort to legislative history to cloud a statutory text that is clear D. holding that unless a statute is ambiguous on the point at issue a court should not resort to legislative history in interpreting it E. holding courts must adhere to legislative intent when interpreting a statute

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that unless a statute is ambiguous on the point at issue a court should not resort to legislative history in interpreting it