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: 2698; 69 L.Ed.2d 548 (1981), section 633a of the ADEA and section 2000e-16 of Title VII are substantially similar. Lehman, 453 U.S. at 163, 101 S.Ct. at 2703 (section 633a “patterned after” section 2000e-16 “which extended protection of Title VII to federal employees”). Therefore, under the reasoning of Agency Holding Corp., 483 U.S. at 150-51, 107 S.Ct. at 2764-65, Title VII’s thirty-day limitation period, found in section. 2000e-16(c), properly governs the parallel ADEA cases brought under section 633a. Admittedly, this rationale does not address the omission of the thirty-day limitation period from the final version of section 633a — the second question that plagued the Bornholdt court. See Bornholdt, 869 F.2d at 66; see also Lubniewski v. Lehman, 891 F.2d 216, 220-21 (9th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>): However, as the First Circuit explained in Options: A. holding that legislative history leading up to section 633as enactment indicates that congress deliberately decided that a federal employee should not have to file her adea claim within thirty days of receiving notice of an adverse eeoc decision B. holding that the laterserved defendants had thirty days from the date of service on them to file a notice of removal with the unanimous consent of their codefendants even though the firstserved codefendants did not file a notice of removal within thirty days of service C. holding that federal employee cannot file for damages against supervisor for an unconstitutional adverse personnel action when congress has provided adequate administrative remedy D. holding that the failure to file a motion for review of appellate attorneys fees under rule 9400c within thirty days of rendition waived the issue for appeal E. holding the employee had 180 days to file a claim from the date the employee received final definitive and unequivocal notice of an adverse employment action

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that legislative history leading up to section 633as enactment indicates that congress deliberately decided that a federal employee should not have to file her adea claim within thirty days of receiving notice of an adverse eeoc decision
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 opt to use third-party applications via your account with us , they may gain access to certain information that you have provided to us , including personal data , and they will use , store , and disclose such information in accordance with their individual privacy policies and terms and conditions .

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: Employee has seven (7) days after Employee signs this Agreement to revoke it. This Agreement will become effective on the eighth (8th) day after Employee signs this Agreement, so long as it has been signed by the Parties and has not been revoked by Employee before that date (the “Effective Date”).

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Agreement are defined in (a) Appendix A to the Series 2017-3 Indenture Supplement, dated as of October 1, 2017 (the “ Indenture Supplement ”), between the Grantor, as Issuer, and The Bank of New York Mellon, as Indenture Trustee, or (b) Appendix A to (i) the Fifth Amended and Restated Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of August 1, 2001, as amended and restated as of December 1, 2010, among Ford Credit Floorplan Corporation, as Depositor, the Grantor, as Issuer, and Ford Motor Credit Company LLC, as Servicer, and (ii) the Fifth Amended and Restated Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as of August 1, 2001, as amended and restated as of December 1, 2010, among Ford Credit Floorplan LLC, as Depositor, the Issuer and the Servicer. Each Appendix A also contains usage rules that apply to this Agreement. Each Appendix A is incorporated by reference into this Agreement. References to the “UCC” mean the Uniform Commercial Code as in effect in the State of New York.

assistant: Definitions
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: this shall include ; ( i ) any loss of profit ( whether incurred directly or indirectly ) ; ( ii ) any loss of goodwill or business reputation ; ( iii ) any loss of opportunity ; or ( iv ) any loss of data suffered by you ; b.any loss or damage which may be incurred by you as a result of : i.any reliance placed by you on the completeness , accuracy or existence of any advertising , or as a result of any relationship or transaction between you and any advertiser or sponsor whose advertising appears on the service ; ii .

assistant: Limitation of liability
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: Date), the Company agrees to pay interest in respect of the unpaid principal amount of each Eurodollar Loan from the date the proceeds thereof are made available to the Company to (but excluding) the earlier of the conversion or maturity (whether by acceleration or otherwise) of such Eurodollar Loan, at a rate per annum which shall, during each Interest Period applicable thereto, be equal to the sum of the Applicable Margin plus the Eurodollar Rate for such Interest Period.

assistant: Closings
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: this clause, Lefever contends that the trial court considered Hargrave’s motion before it entered its order. Relying upon North E. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Aldridge, 400 S.W.2d 893, 895 (Tex.1966), Lefever asserts that the Mother Hubbard clause disposes of all issues that were before the trial court prior to its April order, including Hargrave’s motion. Aldridge stands for the general rule that for appeal purposes, it is presumed a trial court intended to dispose of all parties and issues before it when a judgment is rendered and entered in a case. See 400 S.W.2d at SOT-OS. However, the presumption does not apply to a judgment that affirmatively reserves some ultimate issues or decisions for future adjudication. See Zellers v. Barthel, 727 S.W.2d 364, 365 (Tex.App.Fort Worth 1987, no writ) (<HOLDING>). In the instant matter, the record and the Options: A. holding that an order addressing each parents motion to modify but failed to reference wifes motion to enforce an out of state judgment was not a final appealable order B. holding that an order was interlocutory in nature despite the trial courts certification of the order as a final appealable judgment C. holding that an order denying a motion to correct reduce or modify a sentence under rule 3800 is not appealable D. holding an order denying a motion for summary judgment is interlocutory and not appealable E. recognizing that an order denying a motion to modify a family court order where the motion is based on changed factual or legal circumstances is appealable as a special order after final judgment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that an order addressing each parents motion to modify but failed to reference wifes motion to enforce an out of state judgment was not a final appealable order
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 party waives, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, any right it may have to a trial by jury in respect of any suit, action or proceeding relating to the Transaction. Each party (i) certifies that no representative, agent or attorney of the other party has represented, expressly or otherwise, that such other party would not, in the event of such a suit, action or proceeding, seek to enforce the foregoing waiver and (ii) acknowledges that it and the other party have been induced to enter into the Transaction, as applicable, by, among other things, the mutual waivers and certifications provided herein.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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: By submitting a Description of Services Order, Customer agrees to take and pay for, and, by accepting the Description of Services Order, Data Foundry agrees to provide, the Service(s) during the Initial Term and for any Renewal Term, as specified in paragraph 2.2(b) below.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: EACH OF THE PARTIES TO THIS AGREEMENT HEREBY IRREVOCABLY WAIVES ALL RIGHTS TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN ANY ACTION, PROCEEDING OR COUNTERCLAIM ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR THE TRANSACTIONS CONTEMPLATED HEREBY.

assistant: Waiver Of Jury Trials
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: was admissible. The likelihood that a different result would have been reached (no verdict of death) if a properly worded jury instruction had been given, is remote. Therefore, the harmless error analysis offered by the Warden is correct. Claims 25 and 26 are dismissed. NRS 34.770(2). Exhibit R5, pp. 979-81. Rogers appealed. See Exhibit P563. On May 13, 2002, the Nevada Supreme Court affirmed. Exhibit P564. The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed, on procedural grounds, the dismissal of Rogers’ claims regarding the torture, depravity of mind, or e in this case, providing for a depravity-of-mind aggravating circumstance, was unconstitutionally vague. See Valerio v. Crawford, 306 F.3d 742, 747 (9th Cir. 2002) (en banc), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 994, 123 S.Ct. 1788, 155 L.Ed.2d 695 (2003) (<HOLDING>); Deutscher v. Whitley, 884 F.2d 1152, 1162 Options: A. holding unconstitutionally vague under the reasoning of godfrey an aggravatingcircumstances instruction directing jurors to determine whether the murder was especially heinous atrocious and cruel B. holding factor b is not unconstitutionally vague C. holding the same nevada aggravating circumstance unconstitutionally vague under godfrey D. holding that oklahomas especially heinous atrocious or cruel aggravating circumstance was unconstitutionally vague E. holding that an aggravating circumstance in the georgia death penalty statute was unconstitutionally vague

assistant: The best answer is C. holding the same nevada aggravating circumstance unconstitutionally vague under godfrey
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: is to be judged by the trier of fact.”) Schledwitz v. United States, 169 F.3d 1003, 1015 (6th Cir. 1999) ("Bias is always relevant in assessing a witness’s credibilityi”). See also Tenth Circuit Criminal Pattern Jury Instructions, Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction Committee of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, 1.08 (2011, rev. 2015) (listing numerous factors for the jury to consider when assessing credibility). 22 . Smith, 156 F.3d at 1053 ("[J]urors using common sense and their faculties of observation can judge the credibility of an eyewitness identification, especially since deficiencies or inconsistencies in an eyewitness's testimony can be brought out with skillful cross-examination.”); McEwen v. City of Norman, Okl., 926 F.2d 1539, 1546 (10th Cir. 1991) (<HOLDING>); Franklin Life Ins. Co. v. Heitchew, 146 F.2d Options: A. recognizing a common knowledge exception B. holding that jurors do not need expert testimony on matters of common knowledge C. holding that expert testimony should not be admitted as to a matter that is obviously within the common knowledge of jurors because such testimony almost by definition can be of no assistance D. holding that expert testimony should be excluded when jury is equally competent to form an opinion about ultimate fact issue or experts testimony is within jurys common knowledge E. recognizing common knowledge exception

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that jurors do not need expert testimony on matters of common knowledge
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 Escrow Agreement may not be amended or modified, except by a written instrument executed by Buyer, Seller, Consultants’ Representative (solely with respect to provisions that may affect the rights or obligations of the Consultants hereunder), and the Escrow Agent.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: to render an informed decision on the claim”); see also Cullens, 14 Vet.App. at 237 (noting burden on Secretary to prove substantial justification in administrative and litigation positions); Evans v. West, 12 Vet.App. 22, 31 (1998) (Court will give no consideration to a “vague assertion” or an “unsupported contention”). Moreover, as noted by Mrs. Padgett, the Secretary failed to take any position on the Court’s “cleai'ly erroneous” standard of review at the administrative stage of the proceedings, but rather the Secretary only took such a position on the issue after the Board rendered its decision and Mr. Pad-gett had filed his initial appeal to the Court. See generally Martin v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm’n, 499 U.S. 144, 146, 111 S.Ct. 1171, 113 L.Ed.2d 117 (1991) (<HOLDING>). Based on the totality of the circumstances, Options: A. holding that agency litigating positions are not entitled to judicial deference when they are merely posthoc rationalizations for agency action and are advanced for the first time on appeal B. holding that agency interpretation which is reasonable is entitled to deference C. holding that a longstanding agency interpretation was no longer entitled to chevron deference given that the agency had changed its position on the issue D. holding that chevron deference is due only when the agency acts pursuant to delegated authority and the agency action has the force of law E. holding that deference to an agency interpretation is not appropriate where a statute is administered by more than one agency

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that agency litigating positions are not entitled to judicial deference when they are merely posthoc rationalizations for agency action and are advanced for the first time on appeal
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 Guarantee may be executed by one or more of the parties to this Guarantee on any number of separate counterparts (including by facsimile or other electronic transmission (e.g. a “pdf” or “tif” file)), and all of said counterparts taken together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument. A set of the copies of this Guarantee signed by all the parties shall be lodged with the Collateral Agent and the Company.

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: Except as disclosed on Section 3.22 to the Schedule of Exceptions, none of the Company or any of the Company’s directors, officers, employees, consultants, advisors or agents, nor any Seller, has employed or incurred any Liability to any broker, finder or agent with respect to this Agreement, the Transaction Documents and the transactions contemplated hereby.

assistant: Brokers
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 to be made by Borrower shall be made without deduction for any counterclaim, defense, recoupment or setoff. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, all payments by Borrower hereunder shall be made to Administrative Agent, for the account of the respective Lenders to which such payment is owed, at Administrative Agent’s Office in Dollars and in immediately available funds not later than noon on the date specified herein. Subject to Section 2.14 , Administrative Agent will promptly distribute to each Lender its Applicable Percentage in respect of the Facility (or other applicable share as provided herein) of such payment in like funds as received by wire transfer to such Lender’s Lending Office. All payments received by Administrative Agent after 2:00 p.m. shall be deemed received on the next succeeding Business Day and any applicable interest or fee shall continue to accrue. If any payment to be made by Borrower shall come due on a day other than a Business Day, payment shall be made on the next following Business Day, and such extension of time shall be reflected when computing interest or fees, as the case may be.

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: either the party’s individual or representative capacity....” HRE Rule 803(a)(1). The text messages qualify as statements offered by Respondent against Petitioner to show Petitioner’s history of threats against the Complainant and, hence, were admissions by a party-opponent under HRE Rule 803(a)(1). Petitioner and Respondent thus also appear correct that the actual text messages would be admissible as an exception to hearsay under HRE Rule 803(a)(1). 2. Next, inquiry must be made as to whether testimony about the text messages constitutes hearsay and whether such testimony is admissible under an exception to the rule again ble under an exception to the rule against hearsay,- then testimony about such evidénee is admissible. See People v. Taylor 117 A.D.2d 829, 499 N.Y.S.2d 151 (1986) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the Complainant’s testimony about the Options: A. holding that the improper admission of hearsay testimony from two witnesses whose testimony was brief and consistent with the victims testimony did not constitute drumbeat repetition of the victims statements B. holding that victims writing in his own blood of attackers name was hearsay admissible under the exceptions for dying declarations and excited utterances and therefore testimony from witnesses regarding the writing was admissible C. holding hearsay admissible in revocation hearings D. holding that testimonial statements are subject to the requirements of the confrontation clause even if they are otherwise admissible under the hearsay exception for excited utterances E. holding that statements made while the declarant was in pain crying bleeding and having trouble breathing were properly admissible as excited utterances

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that victims writing in his own blood of attackers name was hearsay admissible under the exceptions for dying declarations and excited utterances and therefore testimony from witnesses regarding the writing was admissible
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 (including those provisions set forth in the Plan that are incorporated herein by reference) and the Grant Notifications, and all actions taken hereunder or under the Plan shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the State of New York without regard to the conflict of law principles thereof.

assistant: Applicable 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: the five appellants lacked standing to seek injunctive relief does have the “practical effect” of denying an injunction, because it has “erected a ‘legal barrier’ foreclosing any meaningful future consideration of a formal application” for injunctive relief by these particular appellants. Plymouth Nuclear, 655 F.2d at 17. This Court may therefore only premise its jurisdiction on a showing that appellants face “serious, perhaps irreparable, harm” upon the denial of immediate review. Carson, 450 U.S. at 84, 101 S.Ct. 993. The procedural history of the instant litigation, specifically appellants’ failure to pursue appellate (or other) review of the district court’s earlier denial of a preliminary injunction, points against a finding of serious harm. Plymouth Nuclear, 655 F.2d at 17-18 (<HOLDING>). In this case, appellants’ motion for a Options: A. holding plaintiffs appeal of the denial of a preliminary injunction moot where defendants directive no longer in effect B. holding that interim awards of attorneys fees are inappropriate where the only relief obtained is a preliminary injunction which may be subsequently overturned on the merits C. holding that plaintiffs were not entitled to a preliminary injunction D. holding that the failure to appeal from or move for reconsideration of a previous denial of a preliminary injunction makes interim relief a dead issue and is indicative of a lack of serious harm E. holding that a movant for a preliminary injunction must first demonstrate that it is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of the requested relief

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the failure to appeal from or move for reconsideration of a previous denial of a preliminary injunction makes interim relief a dead issue and is indicative of a lack of serious harm
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: have been fully ascertained and considered.” (emphasis added); see also 25 U.S.C. § 1404(2) (requiring the Secretary to submit to Congress “a statement of the extent to which such plan reflects the desire of the Indian tribe or individuals which are entitled to such funds”) (emphasis added). Nevertheless, plaintiffs and plaintiff-intervenors rely on Short v. United States, 12 Cl.Ct. 36 (1987), in arguing that the Distribution Act does not apply. See Pls.’ Supplemental Br. at 2. Plaintiffs contend that Short “held that 25 [U.S.C.] § 1401 did not apply because the judgment was issued in favor of individual Indian class beneficiaries.” Pis.’ Supplemental Br. at 3. Shor terest in the lands and funds resulting from the Appropriations Acts. See, e.g., Tee-Hit-Ton Indians, 120 F.Supp. at 204 (<HOLDING>). For these reasons, the court finds that Options: A. holding that a company that cut and removed timber from land that secured a debt held by the plaintiff was liable as a matter of law under an earlier version of the gtccs because it had not first obtained the written consent of the plaintiff B. holding that the burden is on the plaintiff C. holding that where an express contract was in place between plaintiff and defendant that governed the compensation sought by plaintiff plaintiff may not recover under a theory of unjust enrichment D. holding that individuals representing the plaintiff clan constituted an identifiable group where land was claimed by the plaintiff clan as a whole E. holding that the government may be an identifiable victim

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that individuals representing the plaintiff clan constituted an identifiable group where land was claimed by the plaintiff clan as a whole
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 signed in counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures thereto and hereto were upon the same instrument and all of which shall constitute a single agreement. Delivery of an executed counterpart of this Agreement by telefacsimile, pdf file or other electronic method of transmission shall be equally as effective as delivery of an original executed counterpart of this Agreement. Any party delivering an executed counterpart of this Agreement by telefacsimile, pdf file or other electronic method of transmission also shall deliver an original executed counterpart of this Agreement but the failure to deliver an original executed counterpart shall not affect the validity, enforceability, and binding effect of this Agreement. The foregoing shall apply to each other Loan Document mutatis mutandis.

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: child a FAPE, it was incumbent on them to bring that to the school’s attention via the available statutory mechanisms,” and on that basis denied relief. (J.A. at 179.) In this connection, the district court noted that“[s]chool boards must be given adequate notice of problems if they are to remedy them, and must be given sufficient time to respond to those problems before they can be held hable for failure to act.” (J.A. at 179-80 (citing Combs, 15 F.3d at 363-64).) Several of our sister circuits have concluded that an award of “compensatory education” — educational services ordered by the court to be provided prospectively to compensate for a past deficient program — may be “appropriate relief” under the IDEA. See, e.g., Ridgewood Bd. of Educ. v. N.E., 172 F.3d 238, 249 (3d Cir. 1999) (<HOLDING>); Board of Ed. of Oak Park & River Forest High Options: A. recognizing that family court cannot eliminate compensatory part of maintenance award B. recognizing appropriateness of compensatory education award and holding that plaintiff was entitled to recover compensatory education if she prevailed in her claim that she was denied a fape for several years C. holding that conduct must be beyond the fraud which supported compensatory damages to award punitive damages D. recognizing appropriateness in some circumstances of award of compensatory education beyond age 21 and remanding for determination of whether it should be awarded E. recognizing equitable nature of back pay award under age discrimination in employment act

assistant: The best answer is D. recognizing appropriateness in some circumstances of award of compensatory education beyond age 21 and remanding for determination of whether it should be awarded
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: All Confidential Information (including all copies thereof) shall remain the property of Discloser. All copies shall bear all proprietary markings contained on or in the originals. No rights or licenses to trademarks, inventions, copyrights, patents or any other intellectual property rights are implied or granted under this Agreement.

assistant: No
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 hereby employs the Executive as an employee, and the Executive agrees to be employed by the Company, upon the terms and conditions set forth herein. While serving as an employee of the Company, the Executive shall serve as the President, BioStim of the Company, and be appointed to serve as the President, BioStim of the Parent. The Executive shall have such power and authority and perform such duties, functions and responsibilities as are associated with and incident to such positions, and as the Board may from time to time require of him. The Executive also agrees to serve, if elected, as an officer or director of Parent or any other direct or indirect subsidiary of the Parent, in each such case at no compensation in addition to that provided for in this Agreement, but the Executive serves in such positions solely as an accommodation to the Company and such positions shall grant him no rights hereunder (including for purposes of the definition of Good Reason).

assistant: Duties
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: Upon the payment in full of the Obligations and termination of the Security Agreement, the Collateral Agent shall execute, acknowledge, and deliver to the Grantors an instrument in writing in recordable form releasing the collateral pledge, grant, assignment, lien and security interest in the Copyrights under this Copyright Security Agreement.

assistant: Terminations
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 parties hereto irrevocably agree that any suit, action or proceeding seeking to enforce any provision of, or based on any matter arising out of or in connection with, the Transaction Documents or the Transactions shall be brought exclusively in federal or state courts located in the state of New York, and each of the parties hereby irrevocably consents to the exclusive jurisdiction of such courts (and of the appropriate appellate courts therefrom) in any such suit action or proceeding and irrevocably waives, to the fullest extent permitted by law, any objection that it may now or hereafter have to the laying of the venue of any such suit action or proceeding in any such court or that any such suit, action or proceeding brought in any such court has been brought in an inconvenient forum. Each of the parties agrees not to commence any action, suit or proceeding relating thereto except in the courts described above in New York, other than actions in any court of competent jurisdiction to enforce any judgment, decree or award rendered by any such court in New York as described herein. Each of the parties further agrees that notice as provided herein shall constitute sufficient service of process and the parties further waive any argument that such service is insufficient. Each of the parties hereby irrevocably and unconditionally waives, and agrees not to assert, by way of motion or as a defense, counterclaim or otherwise, in any action or proceeding arising out of or relating to the Transaction Documents or the Transactions, (a) any claim that it is not personally subject to the jurisdiction of the courts in New York as described herein for any reason, (b) that it or its property is exempt or immune from jurisdiction of any such court or from any legal process commenced in such courts (whether through service of notice, attachment prior to judgment, attachment in aid of execution of judgment, execution of judgment or otherwise) and (c) that (i) the suit, action or proceeding in any such court is brought in an inconvenient forum, (ii) the venue of such suit, action or proceeding is improper or (iii) the Transaction Documents, or the subject matter hereof, may not be enforced in or by such courts.

assistant: Consent 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 execution and delivery of this Supply Agreement and the performance of such Party’s obligations hereunder (a) do not conflict with or violate any requirement of applicable laws, regulations or orders of any court, governmental body or administrative agency having jurisdiction over this Supply Agreement and the Party’s obligations hereunder; and (b) do not conflict with, or constitute a default under, any contractual obligation of such Party.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this Agreement, the balance of the Restricted Stock Units that have not vested pursuant to Paragraphs 4 or 5 at the time the Grantee ceases to be in Continued Service will be forfeited and automatically transferred to and reacquired by the Company at no cost to the Company. The Grantee shall not be entitled to a refund of any of the price paid for the Restricted Stock Units forfeited to the Company pursuant to this Paragraph 7.

assistant: Forfeitures
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 amendment or waiver of any provision of this Agreement or any other Transaction Document, or consent to any departure by the Seller or the Servicer therefrom, shall be effective unless in a writing signed by the Administrator, the LC Bank and each of the Majority LC Participants and Majority Purchaser Agents, and, in the case of any amendment, by the other parties thereto; and then such amendment, waiver or consent shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose for which given; provided , that, to the extent required by the securitization program of any Conduit Purchaser, no such material amendment shall be effective until the Rating Agency Condition shall have been satisfied with respect thereto (the Administrator hereby agrees to provide executed copies of any material amendment to or waiver of any provision of this Agreement to the Rating Agencies); provided , further that no such amendment or waiver shall, without the consent of each affected Purchaser, (A) extend the date of any payment or deposit of Collections by the Seller or the Servicer, (B) reduce the rate or extend the time of payment of Discount, (C) reduce any fees payable to the Administrator, any Purchaser Agent or any Purchaser pursuant to the applicable Purchaser Group Fee Letter, (D) change the amount of Capital of any Purchaser, any Purchaser’s pro rata share of the Purchased Interest or any Related Committed Purchaser’s or LC Participant’s Commitment, (E) amend, modify or waive any provision of the definition of “ Majority Purchaser Agents ” or this Section 6.1 , (F) consent to or permit the assignment or transfer by the Seller of any of its rights and obligations under this Agreement, (G) change the definition of “ Defaulted Receivable ,” “ Delinquent Receivable ,” “ Eligible Receivable ,” “ Facility Termination Date ” (other than an extension of such date in accordance with clause (H) and Section 1.22 ), “ Loss Reserve ,” “ Loss Reserve Percentage ,” “ Dilution Reserve ,” “ Dilution Reserve Percentage ” or “ Termination Event ”, (H) extend the “ Facility Termination Date ” or (I) amend or modify any defined term (or any defined term used directly or indirectly in such defined term) used in clauses (A) through (I) above in a manner that would circumvent the intention of the restrictions set forth in such clauses. No failure on the part of the Purchasers, the Purchaser Agents or the Administrator to exercise, and no delay in exercising any right hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise of any right hereunder preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right.

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: (a) The Subsidiaries listed on Schedule 4.14 constitute all the Subsidiaries of the Borrower as of the Effective Date. Schedule 4.14 sets forth as of the Effective Date the name and jurisdiction of incorporation of each Subsidiary and, as to each Subsidiary, the percentage of each class of Capital Stock owned by any Loan Party and the designation of such Subsidiary as a Restricted Subsidiary, an Immaterial Subsidiary and/or an Unrestricted Subsidiary.

assistant: Subsidiaries
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: recognized that the application of § 1988 "is limited to cases arising under our civil rights laws, a category of cases in which attorneys’ fees have traditionally been regarded as appropriate.” Id., at 5912. The federal courts have consistently held that in order to recover fees under § 1988 a party must bring an action to enforce one of the civil rights enumerated therein. In the recent case of Lauritzen v. Secretary of the Navy, 546 F. Supp. 1221, 1224 (C.D. Cal. 1982) it was held: Plaintiff did not bring this action to enforce any of the specific provisions (i.e., § 1981, etc.) enumerated in § 1988. Instead, she claimed a right to relief directly under the United States Constitution and under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971) (<HOLDING>). See also Davis v. Passman, 422 U.S. 228, 99 Options: A. holding that the government may not introduce evidence obtained through violations of the fourth amendment B. recognizing private damage action for fourth amendment violations by federal officers C. recognizing an implied fourth amendment action for damages D. recognizing private right of action E. recognizing that no private right of action exists for subsection a violations

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing private damage action for fourth amendment violations by federal officers
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: to insureds. The statute in pertinent part provides: Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, an insured under any insurance policy as set out in the general laws or otherwise may bring an action against the insurer issuing the policy when it is alleged the insurer wrongfully and in bad faith refused to pay or settle a claim made pursuant to the provisions of the policy, or otherwise wrongfully and in bad faith refused to timely perform its obligations under the contract of insurance. § 9-1-33(a) (emphasis added). Although the Rhode Island Supreme Court has not addressed this question directly, it has balked at attempts to broaden § 9-1-33(a)’s cause of action beyond what the statute explicitly provides. See, e.g., Richard v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield, 604 A.2d 1260, 1262 (R.I.1992) (<HOLDING>); LeFranc v. Amica Mut Ins. Co., 594 A.2d 382, Options: A. holding individual defendants are not an employer within meaning of title vii B. holding that healthcare provider was not an insurer within the meaning of 9133 C. holding that a state is not a person within the meaning of 1983 D. holding that health insurer contracted with fehba was not acting under a federal agency within the meaning of the federal officer removal statute E. holding that a consent to search is not an interrogation within the meaning of miranda

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that healthcare provider was not an insurer within the meaning of 9133
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 validity, construction and effect of the Plan and the Agreement, and any rules and regulations relating to the Plan and the Agreement, shall be determined in accordance with the internal laws, and not the law of conflicts, of the State of Nevada.

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: (a) Except as has not had and would not reasonably be expected to have, individually or in the aggregate, a Company Material Adverse Effect, the Company and its Subsidiaries own or have a valid and enforceable license to use all Intellectual Property Rights necessary to, or material and used or held for use in, the conduct of the business of the Company and its Subsidiaries as currently conducted, and the Company and its Subsidiaries are currently taking commercially reasonable actions that are reasonably necessary to maintain and protect each material Owned Intellectual Property Right that they own.

assistant: Intellectual Property
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: B 1981)). 54 . Fed.R.Evid. 404(b)(1). 55 . Id. 404(b)(2). 56 . United States v. Beechum, 582 F.2d 898, 911 (5th Cir.1978). 57 . United States v. Freeman, 434 F.3d 369, 374 (5th Cir.2005). 58 . Id. (quoting United States v. Williams, 900 F.2d 823, 825 (5th Cir.1990)). 59 . See United States v. Coleman, 78 F.3d 154, 156 (5th Cir.1996) ("[Intrinsic] evidence is admissible to complete the story of the crime by proving the immediate context of events in time and place."). 60 . United States v. Brooks, 681 F.3d 678, 699 (5th Cir.2012), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 133 S.C 1991 amendments. 67 . See id. 103(a) ("A party may claim error in a ruling to admit or exclude evidence only if the error affects a substanti . 406 advisory committee’s notes, 1972 proposed rules). 82 . Leonard, 499 F.3d at 442 (<HOLDING>). 83 . Id. 84 . United States v. Options: A. holding that even if an insurance broker is the agent of the insurance company for purposes of soliciting and procuring the policy that would not necessarily make the broker the agent of the insurance company for the purpose of receiving notice of suits and claims B. holding that a district court abused its discretion in admitting comments an insurance agent made to five clients over the course of a decade when the record demonstrated the agent had sold nearly two hundred such policies C. holding that the employer was not the insurers agent D. holding district court abused its discretion in admitting state court findings of fact E. holding the trial court had abused its discretion in admitting several photographs of a murder victims body

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a district court abused its discretion in admitting comments an insurance agent made to five clients over the course of a decade when the record demonstrated the agent had sold nearly two hundred such policies
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 acknowledge and agree that airbnb shall have the right to use any verified images in advertising , marketing and/or any other business purposes in any media or platform , whether in relation to your listing or otherwise , without further notice or compensation to you .

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 shall not have been instituted or threatened, from December 31, 2015 through the Closing Date, as reasonably determined by Administrative Agent, any litigation or proceeding in any court or administrative forum to which Borrower is, or is threatened to be, a party which has, or is reasonably likely to result in, a Material Adverse Change.

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: The obligations of each receiving party hereunder shall survive for a period of five years after the disclosure of the Confidential Information or until such time as all Confidential Information of the other party disclosed hereunder becomes publicly known and made generally available through no action or inaction of the receiving party, whichever is earlier.

assistant: Yes
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: agree which documents evince their agreement. Smart Call argues the unsigned service agree ment, which requires any disputes to be submitted to arbitration in Ohio under Ohio law, is the contract. Conceding the document is unsigned and does not name Genio as a party, Smart Call argues the accompanying e-mails constitute written confirmation of its terms sufficient to make the contract enforceable. See Tex. Bus. & Com.Code § 2.201(b) (providing an unsigned contract for goods may be enforceable upon written confirmation of the contract’s terms). Smart Call further argues the forum-selection clause is evidence of Smart Call’s intent to avoid availing itself of the benefits and protections of Texas law. See Michiana, 168 S.W.3d at 792 (citing Burger King, 471 U.S. at 482, 105 S.Ct. 2174) (<HOLDING>). Further, because all of its negotiations with Options: A. holding that rule of construction that specific statutory provisions control general ones should not be applied where provisions can be harmonized B. holding that contracts should be interpreted to give effect to all provisions C. holding that related provisions should be read together D. holding choiceoflaw provisions should be considered when determining purposeful availment E. recognizing that totality of circumstances must be considered in determining permissible inferences

assistant: The best answer is D. holding choiceoflaw provisions should be considered when determining purposeful availment