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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: At the time Optionee exercises his or her Option, in whole or in part, the Company shall withhold from Optionee’s compensation any required taxes, including social security and Medicare taxes, and federal, state and local income tax, with respect to the income arising from the exercise of the Option under this Option Agreement. The Company shall have the right to require the payment of any such taxes before delivering any shares of Common Stock upon the exercise of the Option, or any portion thereof. Optionee may elect to have any such withholding obligations satisfied by: (i) delivering cash; (ii) delivering part or all of the withholding payment in previously owned shares of Common Stock; and/or (iii) irrevocably directing the Company to reduce the number of shares that would otherwise be issued to Optionee upon the exercise of the Option that number of whole shares of Common Stock having a fair market value, determined by the Company, in its sole discretion, equal to the amount of tax required to be withheld or other such amount that will not cause adverse accounting consequences for the Company and is permitted under applicable withholding rules promulgated by the Internal Revenue Service or another governmental entity. If the Option is an Incentive Stock Option, Optionee must immediately notify the Company in writing in the event Common Stock received pursuant to the Option is sold on or before the later of (a) two years after the Grant Date (as set forth in the Grant Notice), or (b) one year after the exercise date of the Option.

assistant: Tax Withholdings
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: In the event of any change in the outstanding shares of Common Stock, without the receipt of consideration by the Company, by reason of a stock dividend, stock split, reverse stock split or distribution, recapitalization, merger, reorganization, reclassification, consolidation, split-up, spin-off, combination of shares, exchange of shares or other change in corporate structure affecting the Common Stock and not involving the receipt of consideration by the Company, the Committee shall make appropriate and equitable adjustments in (a) the aggregate number of shares of Common Stock (i) available for issuance under the Plan, (ii) for which grants or Awards may be made to any Participant or to any group of Participants (e.g., Outside Directors), (iii) which are available for issuance under Incentive Stock Options, (iv) covered by outstanding unexercised Awards and grants denominated in shares or units of Common Stock, (b) the exercise or other applicable price related to outstanding Awards or grants and (c) the appropriate Fair Market Value and other price determinations relevant to outstanding Awards or grants and shall make such other adjustments as may be appropriate under the circumstances; provided, that the number of shares subject to any Award or grant always shall be a whole number.

assistant: Adjustments
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: Except where noncompliance could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, each member of the Controlled Group has fulfilled its obligations under the minimum funding standards of ERISA and the Code with respect to each Single Employer Plan. Each member of the Controlled Group is in compliance with the applicable provisions of ERISA and the Code with respect to each Plan except where such non-compliance would not have a Material Adverse Effect. Except as could not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, each Single Employer Plan complies in all respects with all applicable requirements of law and regulations, no Reportable Event which has or may result in any liability has occurred with respect to any Single Employer Plan, and no steps have been taken to terminate any Single Employer Plan. No member of the Controlled Group has (i) sought a waiver of the minimum funding standard under Section 412 of the Code in respect of any Plan, (ii) failed to make any contribution or payment to any Single Employer Plan or Multiemployer Plan, or made any amendment to any Plan, which has resulted or could reasonably be expected to result in the imposition of a Lien or the posting of a bond or other security under ERISA or the Code having a value individually or collectively in excess of $50,000,000 or (iii) incurred any actual liability under Title IV of ERISA that could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect, other than a liability to the PBGC for premiums under Section 4007 of ERISA or a liability that has been satisfied.

assistant: Erisa
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: Union State Bank v. Galecki, Banking Comm’r, 142 Wis.2d 118, 417 N.W.2d 60, 63 (App.1987)). Further, an agency may not only “reopen and reconsider its orders on particular problem ... but it may also adopt or entertain a different view of the law in subsequent cases.” Union State Bank, 417 N.W.2d at 63 (citing Fond du Lac v. Dep’t of Natural Resources, 45 Wis.2d 620, 173 N.W.2d 605, 608 (1970); State ex rel. Schleck v. Zoning Bd. of App., 254 Wis. 42, 35 N.W.2d 312, 313 (1948)). See also Nick v. State Hwy. Comm’n, 21 Wis.2d 489, 124 N.W.2d 574, 577 (1963), cert. denied, 376 U.S. 963, 84 S.Ct. 1125, 11 L.Ed.2d 981 (1964) (stating that an administrative agency is not bound by its prior determinations); Robertson Transp. Co. v. Public Serv. Comm’n, 39 Wis.2d 653, 159 N.W.2d 636 (1968) (<HOLDING>). Similarly, the Supreme Court of Utah has Options: A. holding that the ijs or bias credibility determinations are not questioned if they are substantially reasonable B. holding that credibility determinations are reviewed only for substantial evidence C. holding that the credibility determinations by the board are virtually unreviewable D. holding that credibility determinations are for the jury E. holding that inconsistencies in determinations arising by comparison are not proof of arbitrariness or eaprieiousness

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that inconsistencies in determinations arising by comparison are not proof of arbitrariness or eaprieiousness
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: characterization of Reinhart’s October 23, 2001, letter to the Auglaize County Sheriff seeking a full investigation of Abel’s alleged “double-dipping” as an adverse action. (Doc. No. 29, Ex. 8). Granted, it was sent after Abel’s October 9, 2001, letter to the SPBR appealing his “forced resignation” (Doc. No. 29, Ex. 6), and a day after an article in the Wapa-koneta Daily News alleging that Plaintiff was forced to resign. (Doc. No. 29, Ex. 7). Not only has Plaintiff failed to show that he was constructively discharged, as set forth below in the Court’s disposition of Plaintiffs state law claims, Abel also fails to demonstrate any concrete emotional distress and/or humiliation he did not first inflict upon himself. See Mattox v. City of Forest Park, 183 F.3d 515, 523 (6th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>). Since Plaintiff cannot establish a violation Options: A. recognizing that in some circumstances injuries based on embarrassment humiliation and emotional distress may be sufficient to sustain a 1983 claim B. holding that a combination of embarrassment humiliation and emotional distress is sufficient to chill for mt healthys purposes C. holding emotional distress is a distinct claim from wrongful death D. holding that a tort claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress is distinct from a claim for emotional distress damages under the employment discrimination statute E. holding in a fcra case that plaintiffs may not rely on mere conclusory statements rather they must sufficiently articulate true demonstrable emotional distress including the factual context in which the emotional distress arose evidence corroborating the testimony of the plaintiff the nexus between the conduct of the defendant and the emotional distress the degree of such mental distress mitigating circumstances if any physical injuries suffered due to the emotional distress medical attention resulting from the emotional duress psychiatric or psychological treatment and the loss of income if any

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing that in some circumstances injuries based on embarrassment humiliation and emotional distress may be sufficient to sustain a 1983 claim
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 AND EACH OTHER LOAN PARTY IRREVOCABLY AND UNCONDITIONALLY AGREES THAT IT WILL NOT COMMENCE ANY ACTION, LITIGATION OR PROCEEDING OF ANY KIND OR DESCRIPTION, WHETHER IN LAW OR EQUITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT OR IN TORT OR OTHERWISE, AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT, ANY LENDER OR ANY RELATED PARTY OF THE FOREGOING IN ANY WAY RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS RELATING HERETO OR THERETO, IN ANY FORUM OTHER THAN THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY AND OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, AND ANY APPELLATE COURT FROM ANY THEREOF, AND EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO IRREVOCABLY AND UNCONDITIONALLY SUBMITS TO THE JURISDICTION OF SUCH COURTS AND AGREES THAT ALL CLAIMS IN RESPECT OF ANY SUCH ACTION, LITIGATION OR PROCEEDING MAY BE HEARD AND DETERMINED IN SUCH NEW YORK STATE COURT OR, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN SUCH FEDERAL COURT. EACH OF THE PARTIES HERETO AGREES THAT A FINAL JUDGMENT IN ANY SUCH ACTION, LITIGATION OR PROCEEDING SHALL BE CONCLUSIVE AND MAY BE ENFORCED IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS BY SUIT ON THE JUDGMENT OR IN ANY OTHER MANNER PROVIDED BY LAW. NOTHING IN THIS AGREEMENT OR IN ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT SHALL AFFECT ANY RIGHT THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT OR ANY LENDER MAY OTHERWISE HAVE TO BRING ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER LOAN DOCUMENT AGAINST THE BORROWER OR ANY OTHER LOAN PARTY OR ITS PROPERTIES IN THE COURTS OF ANY JURISDICTION.

assistant: Submission To Jurisdiction
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 Company and its subsidiaries have insurance covering their respective properties, operations, personnel and businesses, including business interruption insurance, which insurance is in amounts and insures against such losses and risks as are adequate to protect the Company and its subsidiaries and their respective businesses; and neither the Company nor any of its subsidiaries has (i) received notice from any insurer or agent of such insurer that capital improvements or other expenditures are required or necessary to be made in order to continue such insurance or (ii) any reason to believe that it will not be able to renew its existing insurance coverage as and when such coverage expires or to obtain similar coverage at reasonable cost from similar insurers as may be necessary to continue its business.

assistant: Insurances
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: the child’s needs; (iii) The child has been abandoned; or (iv) The parent has failed to make a good faith effort to rehabilitate and reunify with the child pursuant to section 4041. 22 M.R.S. § 4055(B). It is the petitioner’s burden to establish both parental unfitness and best interest by clear and convincing evidence. In re Alana S., 2002 ME 126, ¶ 15, 802 A.2d 976. Further, the court may not even contemplate the child’s best interest until it has found at least one ground of parental unfitness. Id. [¶ 17] Through many years of interpretation, we have concluded that the procedures, burdens, and standards set out in section 4055 constitute the means by which the fundamental constitutional right to parent is safeguarded. See, e.g., In re Robert S., 2009 ME 18, ¶¶ 12-16, 966 A.2d 894 (<HOLDING>); In re Crystal S., 483 A.2d 1210, 1213 Options: A. holding that there is no due process right to appellate review B. holding that the procedure outlined in title 22 preserves a parents right of procedural due process C. recognizing that a parents liberty interest in the custody of a child is subject to due process protection D. holding a plaintiff cannot state a due process claim for defendants failure to follow statutory procedural requirements because a plaintiff cannot have a protect property interest in the procedure itself E. recognizing a 1983 action hvould render superfluous most of the detailed procedural protections outlined in the statute

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the procedure outlined in title 22 preserves a parents right of procedural due process
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 Plan amends and restates the GigPeak, Inc. Change in Control Bonus Plan that became effective on November 17, 2016. The Plan is effective as of February 11, 2017.

assistant: Effective Dates
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: New York law and Michigan law. See Curley v. AMR Corp., 153 F.3d 5, 12 (2d Cir.1998). Both New York and Michigan go beyond the constitutional minimum and require public figures to demonstrate falsity by clear and convincing evidence. See DiBella, 403 F.3d at 111 (New York); Phillips v. Ingham Cnty., 371 F.Supp.2d 918, 929-30 (W.D.Mich.2005) (Michigan). In addition, both states hold defendants “to a standard of substantial, not literal, accuracy.” Law Firm of Daniel P. Foster, P.C., 844 F.2d at 959 (New York); see also Nichols v. Moore, 477 F.3d 396, 399 (6th Cir.2007) (Michigan). Summary judgment is therefore warranted if no reasonable jury could find by clear and convincing evidence that the statements at issue are substantially false. See Anderson, 477 U.S. at 252, 106 S.Ct. 2505 (<HOLDING>). This is “a demanding standard, the most Options: A. holding that we will not review under any standard the pretrial denial of a motion for summary judgment after a full trial and final judgment on the merits B. holding the standard of proof in summary judgment rulings is the same as it would be at trial C. holding that the inquiry involved in a ruling on a motion for summary judgment necessarily implicates the substantive evidentiary standard of proof that would apply at the trial on the merits D. holding that in ruling on a motion for summary judgment the trial court is limited to the grounds raised in the motion E. holding that a trial court can only consider admissible evidence in ruling on a motion for summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the inquiry involved in a ruling on a motion for summary judgment necessarily implicates the substantive evidentiary standard of proof that would apply at the trial 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: should you find your product or service of choice booked through the platform , with the same reservation conditions , at a lower rate on the internet after you have made a reservation through us , we will match the difference between our rate and the lower rate under the terms and conditions of the best price guarantee .

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you may not , without crowdtangle 's prior written permission ( including the permissions granted by these terms of service ) : ( a ) copy , distribute ( including by framing any of the services on any web site ) , modify , enhance , translate , reproduce , sell , resell , sublicense , rent , lease , or otherwise attempt to exploit the services ; ( b ) decompile , disassemble , reverse engineer , or otherwise attempt to discover the source code ( except to the extent that this restriction is expressly prohibited by law ) ; ( c ) make derivative works of the services ; or ( d ) modify another website so as to falsely imply that it is associated with the services , crowdtangle or any other crowdtangle products or services .

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Executive and the Company agree that neither he nor they, nor any of their agents or representatives will disclose, disseminate and/or publicize, or cause or permit to be disclosed, disseminated or publicized, the existence of this Agreement, any of the terms of this Agreement, or any claims or allegations which the Executive believes he or they could have made or asserted against one another, specifically or generally, to any person, corporation, association or governmental agency or other entity except: (i) by means of mutually agreed upon language in a press release or Form 8-K as described herein; (ii) to the extent necessary to report income to appropriate taxing authorities; (iii) in response to an order of a court of competent jurisdiction or subpoena issued under the authority thereof; (iv) in response to any inquiry or subpoena issued by a state or federal governmental agency; or (v) pursuant to the provisions of The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act or The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016. Provided , however , that notice of receipt of any order or subpoena described in clause (iii) shall be emailed to TimefireVR Inc., attention Jeffrey Rassas, jrassas@gmail,com, and in the case of the Executive, to Jonathan Read, jread@quadratum1.com, within 24 hours of the receipt of such order or subpoena, so that both Executive and the Company will have the opportunity to assert what rights they have to non-disclosure prior to any response to the order, inquiry or subpoena.

assistant: Confidentiality
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 and all transactions contemplated hereby shall be governed, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas, without giving effect to the conflict of laws provisions thereof, and any action or proceeding seeking to enforce any provision of this Agreement. The venue shall be Harris County, Texas.

assistant: Governing 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Amendment may be executed in any number of counterpart signature pages, and by the different parties on different counterparts, each of which when executed shall be deemed an original but all such counterparts taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Delivery of an executed counterpart hereof via facsimile or electronic means shall for all purposes be as effective as delivery of an original counterpart.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, 435 U.S. 765, 792 n. 32, 98 S.Ct. 1407, 55 L.Ed.2d 707 (1978) (observing that “[i]dentification of the source of [ballot referendum] advertising may be required as a means of disclosure, so that the people will be able to evaluate the arguments to which they are being subjected”). Citizens United only confirmed the breadth of Congress’ power in this regard. See Citizens United, 130 S.Ct. at 915 (“Even if the ads only pertain to a commercial transaction, the public has an interest in knowing who is speaking about a candidate shortly before an election”); see also Doe v. Reed, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 2811, 2819-22, 177 L.Ed.2d 493 (2010) (upholding disclosure requirement for petition signatories); Natn’l Org. for Marriage v. McKee, 649 F.3d 34, 70 (1st Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>). C Real Truth advances several other reasons Options: A. holding that ors 1660651e 1985 was unconstitutional because it potentially reached areas of communication that would be constitutionally privileged and it incorporated a definition of obscenity that was unconstitutionally vague B. holding that a court cannot construe claims to read an express limitation out of the claim or render it meaningless C. holding that duration of limitation is a factor in determining whether limitation is significant D. holding that state express advocacy definition without an electioneering communication limitation was not vague E. holding that threat as used in the coercion definition as that definition is incorporated into section 3605s witnesstampering prohibition was not unconstitutionally vague because nature of threat was informed by the harms enumerated in the definition in that case hatred contempt and ridicule

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that state express advocacy definition without an electioneering communication limitation was not vague
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 purpose of the CommScope Holding Company, Inc. Amended and Restated 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is to promote the success, and enhance the value, of CommScope Holding Company, Inc. (the “Company”), by linking the personal interests of employees, officers, directors and consultants of the Company or any Affiliate (as defined below) to those of Company stockholders and by providing such persons with an incentive for outstanding performance. The Plan is further intended to provide flexibility to the Company in its ability to motivate, attract, and retain the services of employees, officers, directors and consultants upon whose judgment, interest, and special effort the successful conduct of the Company’s operation is largely dependent. Accordingly, the Plan permits the grant of incentive awards from time to time to selected employees, officers, directors and consultants of the Company and its Affiliates.

assistant: General
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: temporary, lasting only from May 4, 1995 to August 10, 1995. Defendant reasons that even if the plaintiff suffered from bipolar disorder, that disorder could not substantially interfere with a major life activity because it lasted only four months. Plaintiff has a well-documented history of bipolar disorder since 1989. (Pl.’s Stmt. Ex. 2.) Defendant’s view of plaintiffs disability ignores the teaching of Sutton, where the Supreme Court acknowledged that medication may partially, but not wholly, relieve an impairment that substantially limits a major life activity, and expressly rejected the notion that partial amelioration of a disabling condition renders the individual ineligible for protection under the ADA. Sutton, 527 U.S. at 488, 119 S.Ct. 2139; accord Vande Zande, 44 F.3d at 544 (<HOLDING>). In addition, contrary to the defendant’s Options: A. holding that a proceeding on a writ of error coram nobis is part of the underlying criminal matter B. holding that periodic alimony is not mandatory C. holding evidence of a 13 permanent partial disability insufficient to establish disability for purposes of ada D. holding that the periodic characteristic disabling manifestation is part of the underlying recognized disability E. recognizing the importance of the employers knowledge of the disability

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the periodic characteristic disabling manifestation is part of the underlying recognized disability
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 Company has in full force and effect insurance policies, with extended coverage, insuring the Company and its property and business against such losses and risks, and in such amounts, as are customary for corporations engaged in a similar business and similarly situated and as otherwise may be required pursuant to the terms of any other contract or agreement.

assistant: Insurances
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: anatomy does not naturally contain external pockets, pouches, or other places in which personal objects can be conveniently carried. To remedy this anatomical deficiency clothing contains pockets. In addition, many individuals carry purses or shoulder bags to hold objects they wish to have with them. Containers such as these, while appended to the body, are so closely associated with the person that they are identified with and included within the concept of one’s person. To hold differently would be to narrow the scope of a search of one’s person to a point at which it would have little meaning. Id. Several other jurisdictions have similarly concluded that the search of a person includes containers held by the person. See United, States v. Robertson, 833 F.2d 777, 784 (9th Cir. 1987) (<HOLDING>); Minnesota v. Wynne, 552 N.W.2d 218, 220 Options: A. holding that search of defendants purse which he carried was authorized by a warrant to search his person B. holding that search of shoulder bag was not authorized by search warrant for apartment C. holding that search of appellants suitcase found on the floor next to the couch on which he was sleeping was an unconstitutional search of his person and was not authorized by a search of the residence D. holding that search of backpack constituted a search of defendants person and was not authorized by search warrant for premises E. holding that acquiescence to a strip and body cavity search did not extend the scope of defendants consent to search his person because of the highly intrusive nature of the search

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that search of backpack constituted a search of defendants person and was not authorized by search warrant for premises
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 continued to sell its products to that third-party.”); Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Network Solutions, 175 F.R.D. 640, 646 (C.D.Cal.1997) (“An allegation of mere negligence in supplying a product used to infringe does not meet this standard.) Inwood, 456 U.S. at 854 n. 13, 102 S.Ct. 2182 (disapproving standard under which defendant would be liable for contributory infringement if defendant ‘could reasonably anticipate’ use of product to infringe).”); David Berg & Co. v. Gatto Int'l Trading Co., 9 U.S.P.Q.2d 1070, 1988 WL 117493, at *11 (N.D.Ill.1988) (“That one ‘could reasonably anticipate’ an illegal use of the mark, however, is not sufficient” to establish contributory trademark infringement.); but see Ciba-Geigy Corp. v. Bolar Pharm. Co., 547 F.Supp. 1095, 1116 (D.N.J.1982) (<HOLDING>), aff'd, 719 F.2d 56 (3d Cir.1983) (but see Options: A. holding that section 43a of the lanham act protects trade dress B. holding under third circuit law that the denial of a motion for reconsideration is reviewed for abuse of discretion C. holding that the statute of limitations for all of plaintiffs eleven causes of action including those brought under lanham act 43a 15 usc 1125a and lanham act 43c 15 usc 1125c is four years D. holding that reasonable anticipation standard for the tort of passing off under section 43a of the lanham act remains the law in the third circuit E. holding that the standard of review for the denial of a motion for reconsideration is governed by the law of the regional circuit

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that reasonable anticipation standard for the tort of passing off under section 43a of the lanham act remains the law in the third circuit
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: As part of its analysis rejecting the “child benefit” principle, the California court in Riles stated that it could not harmonize the reasoning of Allen II, Meek, and Wolman with regard to the loan of other instructional material such as maps, globes, and charts. Riles, 632 P.2d at 960-61. Indeed, the United States Supreme Court has had difficulty reaching harmony in this regard. However, such a disharmony no longer exists in the United States Supreme Court jurisprudence since the Court stated in Mitchell that Meek and Wolman were “no longer good law” in this regard. Mitchell, 530 U.S.at 808. Moreover, not only is the United States Supreme Court now clear in its analysis that textbook and instructional material programs that benefit all children regardless of the sch .S. 1 (1993) (<HOLDING>). The United States Supreme Court has in Options: A. holding the tlo standard governs school searches when school resource officers who although employed by the local police department are primarily responsible to the school district are acting in conjunction with school officials B. holding that a students private school tuition should be reimbursed where parent did not unilaterally place student in private school because the school district tacitly consented to the private school attendance before proposing a different placement C. holding that the establishment clause does not bar local school district from providing a publiclyemployed interpreter for a deaf student in a parochial school D. holding that the regulation prohibits the provision of an interpreter to a student in a sectarian school E. holding that a school district owed the highest degree of care to a student on a school bus such that the district could be liable for the sexual abuse of the student by the school bus driver

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the establishment clause does not bar local school district from providing a publiclyemployed interpreter for a deaf student in a parochial school
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: All payments made to Seller shall be made free and clear of and without deduction or deferment in respect of any demand, set-off, counterclaim, or other dispute, and so far as is legally possible.

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: and Regulations of the State of New York, inmates in New York correctional facilities are subject to three types of disciplinary hearings for violating prison rules. See 7 N.Y.C.R.R. §§ 270.2, 270.3. Tier I hearings address the least serious offenses, which can be punished by loss of privileges such as recreation. See 7 N.Y.C.R.R. § 252.5. Tier II hearings are held to address more serious infractions, for which inmates are subject to up to 30 days of confinement in a Special Housing Unit (SHU). See 7 N.Y.C.R.R. § 253.7. Tier III hearings involve the most serious violations and may result in SHU confinement for the remaining time an inmate has to serve, and forfeiture of “good time” credits. See 7 N.Y.C.R.R. § 254.7. 2 . Although McEachin’s complaint alleges only constitutional v 1987) (<HOLDING>). But see Williams v. Morton, 343 F.3d 212 (3d Options: A. holding that the permissive use by a health food store of the franchisors name did not create an agency relationship B. holding that ijnmates have the right to be provided with food sufficient to sustain them in good health that satisfies the dietary laws of their religion C. holding that assumption of jurisdiction by the state court would infringe upon the right of reservation indians to make their own laws and be governed by them D. recognizing an individuals right of privacy in the content of health records and noting that health records are the property of the health care entity maintaining them E. recognizing that jurors have the right to reject that part of the evidence believed by them to be untrue and to accept that found by them to be true

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that ijnmates have the right to be provided with food sufficient to sustain them in good health that satisfies the dietary laws of their religion
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 may be executed in two counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but both of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. Signatures provided by facsimile transmission shall be deemed to be original signatures.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: offering was a “reasonable and necessary” and, therefore, deductible cost of Mrs. Black’s estate. Respondent argues that the reimbursement was not “necessary” within the meaning of section 20.2053-3(a), Estate Tax Regs., because the Erie stock belonged to Black LP, not Mrs. Black’s estate, and that Black LP sold the stock. To the extent the secondary offering of Erie stock generated funds needed and used to discharge debts of Mrs. Black’s estate, Black LP’s obligation to reimburse Erie for costs associated with that offering was related to and occasioned by Mrs. Black’s death, and, for that reason, the reimbursement might be deductible by her estate under section 2053. Accord sec. 20.2053-8(d), Example (2), Estate Tax Regs.; see Burrow Trust v. Commissioner, 39 T.C. 1080, 1089 (1963) (<HOLDING>), affd. 333 F.2d 66 (10th Cir. 1964). Moreover, Options: A. holding that trustees fiduciary duty exists independent of any clause in trust agreement B. holding an internal error that caused the movant to receive the trustees notice of motion twentysix days after the court heard the trustees motion may have constituted excusable neglect had the movant made a prompt motion for reconsideration and pointing out it is the movants actions after he became aware of the existence of the trustees motion that reaches the level of willfulness C. holding that trustees act of conveying entire corpus terminated the trust D. holding that the csu board of trustees and individual trustees sued in their official capacity are a political arm of the state and as such are immune from suit E. holding that where a revocable inter vivos trust paid its own trustees fees the settlors estate could nonetheless deduct those fees under section 2053 because the trustees services were primarily occasioned by the death of the decedent

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that where a revocable inter vivos trust paid its own trustees fees the settlors estate could nonetheless deduct those fees under section 2053 because the trustees services were primarily occasioned by the death of the decedent
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: Schedule 3.20 sets forth a description of all insurance maintained by or on behalf of the Loan Parties and their Subsidiaries as of the Effective Date. As of the Effective Date, all premiums in respect of such insurance have been paid. The Loan Parties believe that the insurance maintained by or on behalf of the Loan Parties and their Subsidiaries is adequate and is customary for companies engaged in the same or similar businesses operating in the same or similar locations.

assistant: Insurances
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: Executive recognizes that this Agreement contains confidential information and agrees that the contents of this Agreement or any information made available to Executive in the course of entering into this Agreement shall be considered confidential and shall not be disclosed or communicated in any manner except: (a) as required by law or legal process or (b) to Executive’s spouse, domestic partner, or financial/legal advisors, all of whom shall agree to keep such information confidential; whether this Agreement is ultimately agreed to or not by Executive. Executive agrees that breach of this confidentiality obligation is cause for discipline, up to and including termination as well as reimbursement to Sears for any amounts paid to Executive pursuant to this Agreement.

assistant: Confidentiality
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 U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 361 U.S. 29 80 S.Ct. 21 4 L.Ed.2d 10 J. C. CONNER, Petitioner,v.J. Turner BUTLER. No. 328. Decided Oct. 19, 1959. Mr. William S. Frates, for petitioner. Mr. George F. Gilleland, for respondents. PER CURIAM. 1 The petition for writ of certiorari is granted. The judgment of the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion. We hold that the proofs were sufficient to submit to the jury the question whether employer negligence played a part in producing the petitioner's injury. Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U.S. 500, 77 S.Ct. 443, 1 L.Ed.2d 493. 2 For the reasons set forth in his opinion in Rogers v. Missouri Pacific R. Co., 352 U.S. 500, 524, 77 S.Ct. 443, 459, 1 L.Ed.2d 493, Mr. Justice FRANKFURTHER is of the view that the writ of certiorari is improvidently granted. 3 Reversed and remanded with directions.

assistant: 8
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: by the manufacturer and distributed among the public as a cost of doing business, a policy which has moved from a status of questionable legitimacy to wide acceptance as a justification for strict products liability); Andrew O. Smith, Comment, The Manufacture and Distribution of Handguns as an Abnormally Dangerous Activity, 54 U. Chi. L.Rev. 369 (1987) (although recognizing that courts reject the notion, the economics of handgun injuries support the application of the abnormally dangerous activity doctrine to the manufacturing of handguns, especially since the manufacturers inject products into commerce “intended to facilitate the infliction of grave personal injury”); Paul R. Bonney, Manufacturers’ Strict Liability for Handgun Injuries: An Economic Analysis, 73 Geo. L.J. 1437 (1985) (<HOLDING>). We are not persuaded that the articles Options: A. holding that injuries covered by the act are not limited to external traumatic injuries B. recognizing the cause of action C. recognizing that no court has allowed recovery against a manufacturer for injuries caused by a properly functioning handgun but outlining the desirability of such a cause of action and suggesting that handgun manufacturers should in fairness bear the enormous costs of handgunrelated injuries D. holding that manufacturer may be liable for design defects that enhance rather than cause injuries E. holding that the plaintiff was not barred by hrs 3865 from seeking common law tort remedies against his insurer for injuries caused by the insurers outrageous and intentional denial of medical benefits and disability payments because such injuries were not work injuries within the scope of hrs chapter 386

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that no court has allowed recovery against a manufacturer for injuries caused by a properly functioning handgun but outlining the desirability of such a cause of action and suggesting that handgun manufacturers should in fairness bear the enormous costs of handgunrelated injuries
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: we can not and will not establish conditions that will require or encourage children to disclose personal data over and above what is reasonably necessary to participate in any activity features on our web sites .

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: There is no action, suit, proceeding or investigation pending or, to Borrower’s knowledge, threatened in writing against Borrower in any court or by or before any other Governmental Authority, which would have or is reasonably likely to have, a Material Adverse Effect. There is no action, suit, proceeding or investigation pending or, to Borrower’s knowledge, threatened in writing against Guarantor or any other Restricted Party, in any court or by or before any other Governmental Authority, which would have or is reasonably likely to have, a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Litigations
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: at 195-99, 93 S.Ct. 375 (implying that one-man “showup,” in which the police walked the defendant by the victim, may have been suggestive); Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S, 98, 107-09, 97 S.Ct. 2243, 63 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977) (noting state’s concession that “display of a single photograph” of the defendant was suggestive). The Court has, however, suggested that, in some circumstances, the rule may extend beyond one-man showups or the use of single photos. See Simmons, 390 U.S. at 383, 88 S.Ct. 967 (noting that the danger of misidentification is also increased where witnesses are shown “the pictures of several persons among which the photograph of a single such individual recurs or is in some, way emphasized”); Foster v. California, 394 U.S. 440, 442-43, 89 S.Ct. 1127, 22 L.Ed.2d 402 (1969) (<HOLDING>). The facts of the present case are far removed Options: A. holding due process requires suppression of testimony regarding pretrial identification when procedure employed is impermissibly suggestive B. holding that identification testimony given at a pretrial lineup without counsel is per se inadmissible and that the state is not entitled to an opportunity to show that the testimony had an independent source C. holding that series of identification procedures including a threeperson lineup where the defendant stood out due to his height and leather jacket a subsequent onetoone confrontation between the witness and the defendant and a third lineup was impermissibly suggestive D. holding when the defendant timely objected to an incourt identification by an eyewitness the trial judge should have directed the government to provide an outofcourt lineup or other protective procedure to avoid an impermissibly suggestive incourt identification E. holding that to protect defendants sixth amendment rights a court must determine whether witness identification testimony was tainted by impermissibly suggestive procedures

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that series of identification procedures including a threeperson lineup where the defendant stood out due to his height and leather jacket a subsequent onetoone confrontation between the witness and the defendant and a third lineup was impermissibly suggestive