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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 388 U.S. 448 87 S.Ct. 2096 18 L.Ed.2d 1310 CORINTH PUBLICATIONS, INC.v.James P. WESBERRY et al. No. 227. Supreme Court of the United States June 12, 1967 Stanley Fleishman, for petitioner. Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen. of Georgia, and G. Ernest Tidwell, Executive Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondents. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court of Georgia. PER CURIAM. 1 The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted and the judgment of the Supreme Court of Georgia is reversed. 2 THE CHIEF JUSTICE would grant the petition and set the case for oral argument. 3 Mr. Justice CLARK would grant the petition and affirm. 4 Mr. Justice HARLAN adheres to the views expressed in his separate opinions in Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476, 496, 77 S.Ct. 1304, 1 L.Ed.2d 1498, and A Book Named 'John Cleland's' Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure v. Attorney General of Com. of Massachusetts, 383 U.S. 413, 455, 86 S.Ct. 975, 16 L.Ed.2d 1, and on the basis of the reasoning set forth therein would affirm.

assistant: 3
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: Such Seller has all requisite power and authority to execute and deliver this Agreement and the Ancillary Agreements executed and delivered or to be executed and delivered by such Seller in connection with the transactions provided for hereby, to perform all of its obligations hereunder and thereunder and to consummate the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby. The execution, delivery and performance by such Seller of this Agreement and the Ancillary Agreements and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby have been duly authorized by all necessary and proper action on its part, and no additional proceedings or actions on the part of such Seller are necessary to authorize the execution, delivery and performance by such Seller of this Agreement and the Ancillary Agreements and the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby and thereby. This Agreement has been duly executed and delivered by such Seller. This Agreement and each Ancillary Agreement to which such Seller and is a party constitutes, or upon execution and delivery will constitute, the legal, valid and binding obligation of such Seller, enforceable against such Seller in accordance with their respective terms, except as such enforceability may be limited by bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganization, moratorium or similar Laws relating to or affecting the enforcement of creditors’ rights in general and by general principles of equity.

assistant: Authority
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. 231 80 S.Ct. 365 4 L.Ed.2d 267 MITCHELL, Secretary of Labor,v.OREGON FROZEN FOODS CO. et al. No. 33. Supreme Court of the United States January 11, 1960 Miss Bessie Margolin, Washington, D. C., for petitioner. Mr. Martin P. Gallagher, Ontario, Or., for respondents. On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the ninth circuit. PER CURIAM. 1 In view of ambiguities in the record as to the issues sought to be tendered, made apparent in oral argument and the memoranda of counsel subsequently filed at the Court's request, the writ of certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted. 2 Mr. Justice BLACK took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

assistant: 9
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: Plaintiff Annette Szaley appeals the district court’s grant of summary ju 0 F.2d 1409, 1414 (9th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). Among other factors, Casanova performed many Options: A. holding that to establish a prima facie equal pay act claim the plaintiff must show that the jobs being compared are substantially equal B. holding that a plaintiff who cannot establish an equal pay act claim likewise cannot establish a paybased title vii claim C. holding that allegations of employer retaliation are properly governed by title vii and cannot support a claim under 1983 D. holding that same standard applies to equal pay act and title vii wage discrimination claims E. holding that the limitations period for a title vii claim for pay discrimination begins with the first discrete act

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a plaintiff who cannot establish an equal pay act claim likewise cannot establish a paybased title vii 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: Subject to Section 3.2 , for as long as PV has the right to appoint an Investor Designee pursuant to Section 1.1(b) , in the case of PV, and for so long as AF has the right to designate a Board Observer pursuant to Section 1.1(f) , in the case of AF, the Company will provide PV and AF, as applicable, with its monthly (as and when such monthly financial statements are furnished to the Board, but only to the extent that they are so furnished), quarterly and annual financial statements, unless such statements are available on the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis and Retrieval (EDGAR) database of the SEC, in which case such statements shall be deemed delivered to Investors for purposes of this Agreement. In addition, for as long as PV has the right to appoint an Investor Designee pursuant to Section 1.1(b) , in the case of PV, and for so long as AF has the right to designate a Board Observer pursuant to Section 1.1(f) , in the case of AF, upon the request of the applicable Investor, no more than four (4) times per year, the Company will cause members of its senior management to meet with PV and AF, as applicable (in person or by conference telephone as agreed by the Parties) to provide PV and AF, as applicable, with an update regarding developments relating to the Company’s business and to respond to questions from the Investors; provided , that any costs and expenses incurred by PV or AF in connection with such meetings shall be borne solely by PV of AF, as applicable.

assistant: Financial Statements
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 notices, requests, demands, and other communications provided for by this Agreement will be in writing and shall be deemed sufficient upon receipt, when delivered personally or by a nationally-recognized delivery service (such as Federal Express), or three business days after being deposited in the U.S. mail as certified mail, return receipt requested, with postage prepaid, if such notice is properly addressed. Unless otherwise changed in writing, notice shall be properly addressed to Officer if addressed to the address of Officer on Umpqua’s books and records at the time of mailing of such notice, and properly addressed to Umpqua if addressed to Umpqua Holdings Corporation, 1 S.W. Columbia Street, Suite 1200, Portland, Oregon 97258, Attention: Chief Executive Officer.

assistant: Notices
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 initial Servicer shall not (i) consolidate with or merge into any other Person or (ii) convey or transfer all or substantially all of its assets to any other Person; provided, that the Servicer may (A) merge with another Person if (1)(x) the initial Servicer is the entity surviving such merger or (y) the Person with whom the Servicer is merged into or consolidated assumes in writing all duties and liabilities of the initial Servicer hereunder, (2) the initial Servicer shall have delivered prior written notice of such consolidation, merger, conveyance or transfer to the Administrative Agent and (3) immediately after giving effect to such merger, no Termination Event, Unmatured Termination Event or Servicer Termination Event shall have occurred and be continuing and (B) convey or transfer all or substantially all of its assets to a Person if (1) such Person assumes in writing all duties and liabilities of the Servicer hereunder, (2) the initial Servicer shall have delivered prior written notice of such consolidation, merger, conveyance or transfer to the Administrative Agent and (3) immediately after giving effect to such transfer, no Termination Event, Unmatured Termination Event or Servicer Termination Event shall have occurred and be continuing.

assistant: Sales
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: public's understanding and evaluation of the [department's] investigative process, decision-making and overall handling of an important matter involving a fellow police officer.' ” (third alteration in original) (quoting Tompkins, 46 A.2d at 299)); majority at 74, 376 P.3d at 22 ("[T]he Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal ... reasoned that '[t]he public should be ensured that both the activity of public employees who investigate the suspects is open to public scrutiny.' " (third alt l personnel records used to evaluate the performance toward continued employment or promotion” of police officers “shall be considered confidential and not subject to inspection or review without the express written consent of the officer"); Harmon v. Ewing, 285 Va. 335, 745 S.E.2d 415, 417 (Va.2013) (<HOLDING>). Many other states exempt personnel records of Options: A. holding that personnel records or conduct investigative records regarding police officers are exempt from disclosure under virginias freedom of information act which exempts personnel records from disclosure B. holding that the public records act does not mandate disclosure of records protected by tennessee rule of criminal procedure 16 C. holding that draft pleadings are not subject to public records disclosure D. holding that records relating to a student court were not education records E. recognizing privacy interest in medical records requested under freedom of information act

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that personnel records or conduct investigative records regarding police officers are exempt from disclosure under virginias freedom of information act which exempts personnel records from disclosure
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that the court instruct the prosecutor not to make a general-deterrence argument. Moreover, the argument is misleading because general deterrence has nothing to do with the proper weighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances. The Tennessee Supreme Court agreed that the prosecutor’s argument in the present case was improper for this reason, stating that “[unquestionably, any argument based on general deterrence to others has no application to either aggravating or mitigating circumstances. Argument of this nature is inappropriate at a sentencing hearing.” State v. Irick, 762 S.W.2d 121, 131 (Tenn.1988). In my view, the majority oversteps its role by second-guessing the Tennessee Supreme Court’s explicit conclusion on this question of state law. See Cristini v. McKee, 52 .2000) (<HOLDING>). Finally, the prosecutor expressed his Options: A. holding that it is improper to ask a witness to comment on the credibility of another witness B. holding that mentally retarded capital murderers are constitutionally ineligible for death penalty C. holding that the prosecutors request that the jury send a message to the community was improper in the guilt phase of the trial but was not so flagrantly improper as to constitute plain error D. holding that the prosecutors comment regarding the defendants failure to call a potential witness did not shift the burden of proof because it did not implicate the defendants fifth amendment right not to testify E. holding that a prosecutors comment that jurors should impose the death penalty in order to fulfill their societal duty was not improper because the prosecutor did not ask the jury to send a message to other potential murderers or robbers

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a prosecutors comment that jurors should impose the death penalty in order to fulfill their societal duty was not improper because the prosecutor did not ask the jury to send a message to other potential murderers or robbers
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: 1.6 your agreement with skype is made up of the terms and conditions set out in this document , together with any fair usage policies described in this document and additional terms referred to in paragraph 14 ( collectively the `` terms '' ) .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: information of a specified content, then displaying the results, and not any particular assertedly inventive technology for performing those functions”); see also id. (collecting cases). However, the determination of whether other types of computer-implemented claims are abstract has proven more “elusive.” See, e.g., Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Network, Inc., 790 F.3d 1343, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“[P]recision has been elusive in defining an all-purpose boundary between the abstract and the concrete.”) As a result, in addition to comparing claims to prior U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit precedents, courts considering computer-implemented inventions have taken varied approaches to determining whether particular claims are directed to a 01 S.Ct. 1048, 67 L.Ed.2d 155 (1981) (<HOLDING>). Another helpful tool used by courts in the Options: A. holding that claims which were not presented to the motion court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal B. holding that claims directed to a new and useful laboratory technique for preserving hepatocytes a type of liver cell were not abstract C. holding that claims raised by appellant for first time in motion for new trial were untimely and therefore waived D. holding that claims for a method to calculate the optimal cure time for rubber were not abstract E. holding that claims directed to a new and useful technique for using sensors to more efficiently track an object on a moving platform were not abstract

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that claims for a method to calculate the optimal cure time for rubber were not abstract
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: in question). He made no attempt to request the form from his unit counselor after she returned from her two week absence, even though he would have had time to do so. Instead, he filed a complaint in this action dated September 16, 2000, which was only two days after he was placed on refusal status. Accordingly, the Court concludes that Indelicate failed to make a reasonable effort to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to commencing litigation because he had adequate time to request the form from his unit counselor or to complain to the General Counsel of the BOP. See Reish, 1996 WL 221601, at *8, n. 4. Because the remedies are now time-barred, this action is dismissed with prejudice. See Burns v. Moore, No. 99 Civ. 0966, slip op., 2002 WL 91607, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 24, 2002) (<HOLDING>). C. FAILURE TO EXHAUST ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES Options: A. holding that administrative remedies must be exhausted prior to filing a claim in court B. holding that claims not presented to the ij and bia should be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies C. holding that because plaintiff no longer has available administrative remedies his action must be dismissed with prejudice D. holding that the prisoner has the burden of demonstrating he has exhausted his administrative remedies in his complaint E. holding that a plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies when his claim is deemed denied because of failure of administrator to respond in a timely manner

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that because plaintiff no longer has available administrative remedies his action must be dismissed with prejudice
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: (%3) Comply, and cause each of its subsidiaries to comply, with all applicable laws, rules, regulations and orders, such compliance to include compliance with ERISA, Environmental Laws, Anti-Corruption Laws, applicable anti-terrorism and anti-money laundering laws and Sanctions, except to the extent such non-compliance would not be reasonably expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: that may be reviewed by this Court for plain error, even sua sponte, whereas an active inducement, acquiescence, or other affirmative act demonstrates an intentional waiver of an issue or right that this Court will not notice even under plain-error review. Williams v. People, 59 V.I. 1024, 1033 (V.I. 2013). And while, in this case, it was Pickering’s counsel — rather than Pickering himself — who affirmatively stated at oral argument that he does not object to a retrial on unauthorized possession or reckless endangerment, defense counsel is authorized to waive a double jeopardy claim on behalf of the defendant on appeal unless doing so would rise to the level of ineffective assistance of counsel. See, e.g., Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745, 751, 103 S. Ct. 3308, 77 L. Ed. 2d 987 (1983) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Bobo, 586 F.2d 355, 364 n.6 Options: A. holding that issues not raised in an initial brief on appeal are deemed abandoned B. holding that issues not raised in the initial brief on appeal are deemed abandoned C. holding that the decision of what issues to brief on appeal belongs solely to the attorney and not the criminal defendant D. holding an appellant may not use the reply brief to argue issues not argued in the initial brief E. holding issues of fact in dispute are solely for the jury

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the decision of what issues to brief on appeal belongs solely to the attorney and not the criminal defendant
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any term, provision, covenant or restriction of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, void or unenforceable, the remainder of the terms, provisions, covenants and restrictions set forth herein shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated, and the parties hereto shall use their good faith reasonable efforts to find and employ an alternative means to achieve the same or substantially the same result as that contemplated by such term, provision, covenant or restriction. It is hereby stipulated and declared to be the intention of the parties that they would have executed the remaining terms, provisions, covenants and restrictions without including any of such that may be hereafter declared invalid, illegal, void or unenforceable.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the documents referenced herein contain the entire agreement and understanding of the parties concerning the terms and conditions of the Executive’s employment with the Company, and supersedes, terminates and nullifies all prior commitments, agreements and understandings with respect to such relationship between the parties, including any terms, conditions, plans or programs of the Company in effect prior to the Effective Time, other than any employee benefits that were accrued and vested on the Effective Date and the restrictive covenants of the Executive in connection with the Transaction. Except as set forth in the previous sentence, the parties hereto have made no agreements, representations or warranties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement that are not set forth herein.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, together with the Confidentiality Agreement and any documents or agreements relating to the Options, contains the complete, final and exclusive agreement of the parties relating to the terms and conditions of the Executive’s employment and the termination of the Executive’s employment, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous oral and written employment agreements or arrangements between the parties, including but not limited to the offer letter agreement between the Executive and the Company dated April 1, 2014.

assistant: Integration
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 district court was not clearly erroneous in refusing to reduce Burley’s offense level. AFFIRMED. 1 . Burley was sentenced on January 11, 1991, so that the requirements of U.S. v. Jones, 899 F.2d 1097, 1102-03 (11th Cir.), cert, denied, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 275, 112 L.Ed.2d 230 (1990), would apply requiring defendant be given an opportunity to object after sentence is imposed. Burley has not raised the applicability of Jones, but, in any event, the record permits meaningful review because the same objections raised on appeal had been argued before sentence was imposed. See U.S. v. Cruz, 946 F.2d 122, 124 n. 1 (11th Cir.1991) (noting technical violation of Jones but holding record “sufficient for meaningful appellate review"); U.S. v. Villarino, 930 F.2d 1527, 1528-29 (11th Cir.1991) Options: A. holding that purpose for requiring findings of fact to support an alimony award is to assist appellate court in providing meaningful review B. holding failure to make explicit findings of fact and conclusions of law did not preclude meaningful appellate review C. holding that it is not an appellate courts function to make findings of fact D. holding that court is not required to state findings of fact and conclusions of law when denying 3582 motion E. recognizing appellate courts must not make fact findings

assistant: The best answer is B. holding failure to make explicit findings of fact and conclusions of law did not preclude meaningful appellate review
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 the documents referred to herein constitute the entire agreement among the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede all other prior agreements and understandings, both written and oral, between the parties with respect to such subject matter; provided, however, that this Agreement does not supersede or modify the Restrictive Covenant Agreement or the Indemnification Agreement, each of which will remain in effect (and shall be enforceable in addition to and separate from any similar terms of this Agreement) in accordance with their terms.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: constitutional right of due process, so as to mandate reversal. Jones noted that the juvenile had been represented by counsel throughout the juvenile proceedings and that the situation did not involve a complete failure to provide notice of the charges to the juvenile, the juvenile’s attorney, and the parents. Furthermore, the hearing was not adju dicatory but dispositional; even though a substantial right was involved, the hearing did not result in the determination of guilt or confinement. Finally, the court noted that the mother received actual notice as shown by her presence at the hearing, which served to satisfy the dictates of K.S.A. 38-1636(c)(l) (repealed L. 2006, ch. 169, sec. 140). 273 Kan. at 766; see also State v. Muhammad, 237 Kan. 850, 856, 703 P.2d 835 (1985) (<HOLDING>); but cf. In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1, 31-34, 18 L. Options: A. recognizing juveniles right to counsel in certain juvenile proceedings B. holding juveniles statement inadmissible when after being placed in custody police took juvenile to police station and held juvenile in area where adult suspects were held instead of taking juvenile to a juvenile processing office or any of the places listed as an alternative in section 5202 and placing juvenile in specifically designated office for juveniles C. recognizing that the admonition to function in a parental relationship is not an invitation to procedural arbitrariness and holding that a juvenile is entitled to a hearing on the issue of whether juvenile court jurisdiction should be waived before being released to a criminal court for prosecution D. holding that although the juvenile restitution statute does not expressly require the juvenile court to determine whether the juvenile has the ability to pay the restitution ordered as a condition of probation the policies underlying the adult restitutions command that a trial court make such an inquiry applies with equal force to juvenile courts E. holding that the court without violating due process of the law may conduct a hearing to determine whether to waive juvenile jurisdiction even if the juvenile fails to appear if counsel is present and allowed to participate on the juveniles behalf

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the court without violating due process of the law may conduct a hearing to determine whether to waive juvenile jurisdiction even if the juvenile fails to appear if counsel is present and allowed to participate on the juveniles behalf
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: Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the Borrowers may request the issuance of Letters of Credit denominated in Dollars, in each case for the account of any Borrower, by delivering an LC Application, at any time and from time to time during the Availability Period. In the event of any inconsistency between the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the terms and conditions of any LC Application or other agreement submitted by Borrowers to, or entered into by any Borrower with, the Issuing Bank relating to any Letter of Credit, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall control. Letters of Credit shall constitute utilization of the Commitments.

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: Id. When the defendant properly objected to the error in the charge, reversal is required unless the error was harmless. Id.; see also Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157, 171 (Tex.Crim de an instruction on a defensive issue in the charge for an abuse of discretion, and we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant’s requested submission. See Bufkin v. State, 207 S.W.3d 779, 782 (Tex.Crim.App.2006); Love v. State, 199 S.W.3d 447, 455 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, pet. ref'd). Penal Code section 9.04 provides: The threat of force is justified when the use of force is justified by th erroneously failed to submit appellant’s requested section 9.04 instruction, we must now determine whether this failure caused some harm to appellant. See Ngo, 175 S.W.3d at 743 (<HOLDING>). “To determine if there is any harm, the Options: A. holding that constitutional error cannot be premised on error in a charge unless the error violated some right which was guaranteed to the defendant by the fourteenth amendment B. holding that when defendant properly objects to charge error reversal required unless error was harmless C. holding exclusion was harmless error D. holding that any error was harmless and thus not plain error E. holding a cage violation could never be held harmless error and thus not amenable to harmless error review but rather required outright reversal

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that when defendant properly objects to charge error reversal required unless error was harmless
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 the Investor shall consult with each other in issuing any press releases or otherwise making public statements with respect to the transactions contemplated hereby and no party shall issue any such press release or otherwise make any such public statement, other than as required by law, without the prior written consent of the other parties, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, except that no prior consent shall be required if such disclosure is required by law, in which such case the disclosing party shall provide the other party with prior notice of such public statement. The Investor acknowledges that this Agreement and all or part of the Transaction Documents may be deemed to be “material contracts,” as that term is defined by Item 601(b)(10) of Regulation S-K, and that the Company may therefore be required to file such documents as exhibits to reports or registration statements filed under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act. The Investor further agrees that the status of such documents and materials as material contracts shall be determined solely by the Company, in consultation with its counsel.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The obligations of the Executive and the rights of the Company pursuant to this Section 3 shall survive any termination of this Agreement for the periods of time specified herein, or, if no time limitation is included, indefinitely.

assistant: Survival
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: positive assurance that the arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute. Int’l Union v. Cummins, Inc., 434 F.3d 478, 485 (6th Cir.2006) (citing United Steel-ivorkers v. Mead Cot"p., 21 F.3d 128, 131 (6th Cir.1994)). “The presumption favoring arbitration is based on a policy recognizing arbitration as a ‘substitute for industrial strife,’ see Malone & Hyde, 23 F.3d at 1043 (quoting Warrior & Gulf, 363 U.S. at 578, 80 S.Ct. 1347)), and on the belief that arbitrators, more so than the courts, possess the proper experience and expertise to resolve labor disputes,” id. (citing Litton Fin. Printing Div. v. NLRB, 501 U.S. 190, 213-14, 111 S.Ct. 2215, 115 L.Ed.2d 177 (1991) (Marshall, J., dissenting)). The question presented he 31 (4th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>); United Steelworkers v. The Duluth Clinic, Options: A. holding that a letter of understanding was collateral to the cba and therefore not governed by the cbas arbitration clause B. holding that when an arbitration clause has provisions that defeat the remedial purpose of the statute the arbitration clause is not enforceable and that the language insulating an employer from damages and equitable relief renders the clause unenforceable C. holding that district courts are required to compel arbitration of claims subject to arbitration clause even if the result is piecemeal litigation D. holding that an addendum to the cba was integral to it and therefore subject to the arbitration clause E. holding that the best way to harmonize a choice of law clause and an arbitration clause is to apply the substantive case law of the named state to the entire agreement including the arbitration clause

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an addendum to the cba was integral to it and therefore subject to the arbitration clause
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: of November 23, 1996. Cole clearly made multiple independent statements at the scene of his arrest, at the Milan Police Department, and on the way to the jail, even if their content was similar. The district court, therefore, did not err in finding that Cole made numerous statements, rather than one continuous statement, in which he admitted owning the gun. Cole’s argument might alternatively be construed as a legal claim that because he made one incriminating statement in response to custodial interrogation before having received the warnings mandated by Miranda, his subsequent, similar statements are so tainted that they too are inadmissible. The Supreme Court, however, has squarely rejected this argument. Oregon v. Elstad, 470 U.S. 298, 309, 105 S.Ct. 1285, 84 L.Ed.2d 222 (1985) (<HOLDING>). Because the record reflects that Cole’s Options: A. holding that admission of statements obtained in violation of miranda was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt where the substance of the statements was introduced through other untainted testimony B. holding that a confession obtained in violation of miranda was admissible for impeachment C. holding that a statement obtained in violation of miranda does not by its own force mandate the inadmissibility of subsequent similar statements that were constitution ally obtained D. holding that agents violation of irs regulations did not mandate exclusion of evidence obtained as a result of violation E. holding that although defendants voluntarily given initial statement was inadmissible because of miranda violation subsequent statement made after careful miranda warnings were given and waiver was obtained was admissible

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a statement obtained in violation of miranda does not by its own force mandate the inadmissibility of subsequent similar statements that were constitution ally obtained
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 Purchaser, severally and not jointly with the other Purchasers, covenants that neither it nor any Affiliate acting on its behalf or pursuant to any understanding with it will execute any purchases or sales, including Short Sales of any of the Company’s securities during the period commencing with the execution of this Agreement and ending at such time that the transactions contemplated by this Agreement are first publicly announced pursuant to the initial press release as described in Section 4.4. Each Purchaser, severally and not jointly with the other Purchasers, covenants that until such time as the transactions contemplated by this Agreement are publicly disclosed by the Company pursuant to the initial press release as described in Section 4.4, such Purchaser will maintain the confidentiality of the existence and terms of this transaction and the information included in the disclosure schedules attached hereto. Notwithstanding the foregoing and notwithstanding anything contained in this Agreement to the contrary, the Company expressly acknowledges and agrees that (i) no Purchaser makes any representation, warranty or covenant hereby that it will not engage in effecting transactions in any securities of the Company after the time that the transactions contemplated by this Agreement are first publicly announced pursuant to the initial press release as described in Section 4.4, (ii) no Purchaser shall be restricted or prohibited from effecting any transactions in any securities of the Company in accordance with applicable securities laws from and after the time that the transactions contemplated by this Agreement are first publicly announced pursuant to the initial press release as described in Section 4.4 and (iii) no Purchaser shall have any duty of confidentiality or duty not to trade in the securities of the Company to the Company or its Subsidiaries after the issuance of the initial press release as described in Section 4.4. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of a Purchaser that is a multi-managed investment vehicle whereby separate portfolio managers manage separate portions of such Purchaser’s assets and the portfolio managers have no direct knowledge of the investment decisions made by the portfolio managers managing other portions of such Purchaser’s assets, the covenant set forth above shall only apply with respect to the portion of assets managed by the portfolio manager that made the investment decision to purchase the Securities covered by 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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, together with the Purchase Agreement and Notes and all other Transaction Documents, constitute and contain the entire agreement between Company and the Pledgor and supersede all prior agreements and understandings among the parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and any controversy arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of Delaware, without regard to conflict of law principles that would result in the application of any law other than the law of the State of Delaware.

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: Any term or provision of this Agreement that is held by a court of competent jurisdiction or other Governmental Entity to be invalid, void or unenforceable in any situation in any jurisdiction shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms and provisions of this Agreement or the validity or enforceability of the offending term or provision in any other situation or in any other jurisdiction. If the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction or other Governmental Entity declares that any term or provision of this Agreement is invalid, void or unenforceable, the parties shall negotiate in good faith to modify this Agreement so as to effect the original intent of the parties as closely as possible in an acceptable manner to the end that the transactions contemplated hereby are fulfilled to the fullest extent possible.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: the behavior or driving pattern of someone who is intoxicated. Indeed, we agree with Defendant that the act of smoking legal to-baceo and the act of smoking illegal drugs may appear very similar to the uninitiated and that the two acts would not likely be distinguishable by an untrained or inexperienced observer. While the informant indicated that she could smell the odor of the substance the individuals were smoking, we have no indication in the record as to why she believed that the odor she detected was burning drugs as opposed to incense or any other substance. It may well be that Stacy did have experience with identifying the odor of burning narcotics, as she indicated that she had previously worked with the Weber-Morgan Narcotics Strike Force. Nevertheless, we s 0.App.1992) (<HOLDING>). ¶19 Whether an officer's detection of an odor Options: A. holding that the smell of burning opium was sufficient to establish probable cause B. holding that a smell associated with pcp was enough to establish probable cause C. holding that the smell of alcohol emanating from the defendants vehicle was enough to generate reasonable suspicion D. holding that although pcp has no odor because streetlevel pcp is mixed with other substances that have a distinct odor an officers recognition of that odor was sufficient to establish probable cause E. holding that the smell of marijuana gave the police probable cause to search the vehicle

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a smell associated with pcp was enough to establish probable cause
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: of the firearm m ially covered the requested charge. Neither can we say that any failure on the part of the district court to give the requested instruction “substantially impaired [Miller’s] ability to present an effective defense.” Palma, 511 F.3d at 1315 (quotation marks omitted). Miller raised the issue of whether he had the intention to take control of the firearm during both his opening and closing statements. Specifically, Miller argued to the jury that he did not intend to take control of the firearm, despite his presence on the premises. He thus conveyed the idea that he was merely present and that this was not enough to support a conviction. In view of this, we cannot say that the district court erred. See United States v. Freyre-Lazaro, 3 F.3d 1496, 1505 (11th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). For these reasons, we affirm the judgment of Options: A. holding that trial courts error in failing to sua sponte give instruction was harmless because state did not emphasize this evidence in closing argument and evidence of appellants guilt was otherwise overwhelming B. holding that the district courts failure to give consideration to the sentencing disparity that would result was another reason the defendants sentence was unreasonable C. holding that the district courts failure to give the instruction was not error given that the defendants theory was fully explained in his opening and closing argument D. holding that it was not error for the court to give a substantive new instruction to the jury after deliberations began where the instruction was given in court with the defendant and his counsel present E. holding that failure to give a limiting instruction for 404b evidence is not plain error

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the district courts failure to give the instruction was not error given that the defendants theory was fully explained in his opening and closing argument
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: circumstances, a reasonable person would be warranted in forming the belief that Sennett had committed conspiracy to commit vandalism or aided and abetted acts of vandalism. 19 . Sennett alleges that the government knew, prior to searching her residence, that she was a "known photojournalist” who had published photographs of other demonstrations. The government disputes Sennett’s claim that she is a "known photojournalist,” whatever that phrase may mean, but the government concedes for summary judgment purposes that TFO Antignano and other federal agents were aware, prior to searching Sennett's residence, that Sennett claimed to be a photojournalist and that she had taken photographs of other demonstrations. 20 . See also United States v. Knepper, 256 Fed. Appx. 982, 984 (9th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>) (quoting United States v. Holland, 510 F.2d Options: A. holding that officers were entitled to qualified immunity where defendant officers could have reasonably believed that they were given sufficient third party consent to search B. holding that police officers were not required to rule out all possibility of innocent behavior before arresting defendant for trespassing C. holding that the right of privacy does not extend to sexual behavior that is not purely private that compromises a police officers performance and that threatens to undermine a police departments internal morale and community reputation D. recognizing several factors including the possibility that the persons subject to the police action are themselves violent or dangerous the duration of the action whether the action takes place in the context of effecting an arrest the possibility that the suspect may be armed and the number of persons with whom the police officers must contend at one time E. holding that police officers have no affirmative duty to search out favorable evidence for the defendant

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that police officers were not required to rule out all possibility of innocent behavior before arresting defendant for trespassing