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: written findings of fact, in which the court wrote that Sgt. Norman "rapped on the driver's side window and requested that the window be rolled down.” According to the State, this constitutes a finding that Sgt. Norman's communication was a request, not an order. The court’s very next sentence, and its comments at the hearing, make it clear that the court determined that the “request” was, in fact, an order that Patterson reasonably believed he could not ignore. 5 . Other courts confronting similar facts have come to differing conclusions. See Borowicz v. North Dakota Dep’t of Transp., 529 N.W.2d 186, 188 (N.D.1995) (stating that stop arguably occurred when officer's instruction to open the door could be interpreted as an order); Ebarb v. State, 598 S.W.2d 842, 850 (Tex.Crim.App.1979) (<HOLDING>); but see Akins v. State, 266 Ga.App. 214, 596 Options: A. holding that officers order to roll down window or open door creates a temporary seizure B. holding a car was broken into or entered when defendant reached in through the open window of a car C. holding that it was unreasonable for officers to break down doors that they already knew were open D. holding that an unconstitutional seizure occurred when police officers discovered that a suspect illegally sold alcohol from his home and ordered him to open the door involuntarily to be arrested inside his home E. holding that if a residents decision to open his door to police is made involuntarily a seizure within his home has occurred

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that officers order to roll down window or open door creates a temporary seizure
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 general enactment, Nagel is authorized to seek habeas relief because he is being detained involuntarily in a mental health facility, but the dispositive inquiry here is whether, as an insanity acquittee, he is entitled to pursue that remedy without first seeking discharge in accordance with the specific statute. As to that question, seemingly the weight of authority is to the effect that, where a person has been adjudged insane and committed to an institution, and thereafter seeks to be discharged upon the ground that his sanity has been restored, he can not invoke the writ of habeas corpus without showing that he has exhausted specific statutory remedies, where such are provided. Richardson v. Hall, supra at 606. See also Jackson v. Lowry, 170 Ga. 755, 756-757 (154 SE 228) (1930) (<HOLDING>). Compare Kennedy v. Meara, 127 Ga. 68 (56 SE Options: A. holding that so long as the ordinary established procedure is available to a detainee the orderly procedure should not be interfered with by a writ of habeas corpus cits B. holding that a writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to review the weight of evidence C. holding that a writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to review the weight of evidence D. holding that managing conservator while in texas to seek return of child by writ of habeas corpus may not be served with civil process and is subject to jurisdiction of court in which habeas corpus is pending and only for purpose of prosecuting writ of habeas corpus E. holding that threeyear statute of limitations was not an unconstitutional suspension of the writ of habeas corpus

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that so long as the ordinary established procedure is available to a detainee the orderly procedure should not be interfered with by a writ of habeas corpus cits
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: Waiver by a party of a breach hereunder by another party shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other provision. No delay or omission by a party in exercising or availing itself of any right, power or privilege hereunder shall preclude the later exercise of any such right, power or privilege by such party. No waiver shall be effective unless made in writing with specific reference to the relevant provision(s) of this Agreement and signed by a duly authorized representative of the party granting the waiver.

assistant: Waivers
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 although “[flew courts have had the opportunity to pass on the retroactivity of CAFRA’s provisions, ... those that have done so appear to have looked solely to when the civil forfeiture complaint was filed vis-a-vis the effective date of the Act, and not to when the fraudulent acts underlying the forfeiture action took place.” Id. at 61. Based on these cases and the statute’s language, the court held that Congressional intent is clear and express: [the] CAFRA, by its terms, ‘shall’ apply to all forfeiture cases commenced on or after August 23, 2000.... Had Congress wanted to exclude from [the] CAFRA’s reach cases that are commenced after the effective date of the Act but where the underlying fraudulent conduct occurred prio operty in Section 9, 241 F.3d 796, 799 (6th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). This Court agrees with the All Funds on Options: A. holding that the cafras heightened burden of proof was not applicable to a civil forfeiture action in which the complaint had been filed on november 9 1999 congress manifested a clear intent to apply the cafras heightened burden of proof only to judicial forfeiture proceedings in which the governments complaint was filed on or after august 23 2000because congressional intent is clear we need not resort to judicial default rules to determine the retroactive scope of the legislation B. holding that for an initial civil commitment the state has the burden of proof C. holding that the cafras heightened burden of proof standard was applicable to a civil forfeiture action that was pending at the time of cfras enactment D. holding that the statute at issue created a new cause of action because the burden of proof needed under the statute was less rigorous than the common law burden E. holding that the burden of proof is on the claimant

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the cafras heightened burden of proof standard was applicable to a civil forfeiture action that was pending at the time of cfras enactment
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: Assignor does hereby transfer, assign, grant, and convey to Assignee, its successors and assigns, all of the right, title and interest of Assignor in and to the Assigned Debt only, it being acknowledged by Assignee that the Remaining Debt is not being assigned hereby.

assistant: Assignments
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: 2 . By separate order dated January 31, 2005, the court ruled the Motion to Stay moot and denied the Motion to File a Proposed Amended Complaint. 3 . Plaintiff argues that the Complaint is not just about costs but, rather, is multi-faceted and "includes perhaps the single most important aspect of this situation which is that of the lack of oral pronouncement.” Petitioners’ [sic] Objection and Answer to Defendants [sic] Motion to Dismiss ("Plaintiff’s Obj.”) at 2. However, this argument appears to question the legality and/or constitutionality of Plaintiff’s sentence. The appropriate vehicle for such a challenge in this court is a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 489-90, 93 S.Ct. 1827, 1836, 36 L.Ed.2d 439 (1973)(<HOLDING>). Thus, if Plaintiff is still on probation, see Options: A. holding that the district court mischaracterized a state prisoners 1983 claim as a petition for writ of habeas corpus because the prisoner did not attack his conviction challenge the fact or length of his confinement or seek immediate release from prison B. holding that managing conservator while in texas to seek return of child by writ of habeas corpus may not be served with civil process and is subject to jurisdiction of court in which habeas corpus is pending and only for purpose of prosecuting writ of habeas corpus C. holding that state prisoner attacking validity of fact or length of confinement on federal constitutional grounds is limited to habeas corpus remedy D. holding that federal habeas corpus relief does not lie for errors of state law E. holding that a state prisoner must bring his claim in habeas only if by prevailing he would necessarily prove the unlawfulness of his conviction or confinement

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that state prisoner attacking validity of fact or length of confinement on federal constitutional grounds is limited to habeas corpus remedy
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: On the Closing Date, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein, substantially concurrent with the execution and delivery of this Agreement by the parties hereto, the Company agrees to sell, and the Purchasers, severally and not jointly, agree to purchase, up to an aggregate of $10 million of Shares and Warrants. The Company and each Purchaser shall deliver the items set forth in Section 2.2 at the Closing. Upon satisfaction of the covenants and conditions set forth in Sections 2.2 and 2.3, the Closing shall occur at the offices of the Placement Agent or such other location as the parties shall mutually agree. Unless otherwise directed by the Placement Agent, settlement of the Shares pursuant to Section 2.2(a) shall occur via “Delivery Versus Payment” (“ DVP ”) (i.e., on the Closing Date, the Company shall issue the Shares registered in the Purchasers’ names and addresses and released by the Transfer Agent directly to the account(s) at the Placement Agent identified by each Purchaser; upon receipt of such Shares, the Placement Agent shall promptly electronically deliver such Shares to the applicable Purchaser, and payment therefor shall be made by the Placement Agent (or its clearing firm) by wire transfer to the Company).

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement, together with the Confidential Information Agreement and any equity award agreements between Executives and the Company containing change in control provisions, constitutes the entire agreement of the parties hereto and supersedes in their entirety all prior representations, understandings, undertakings or agreements (whether oral or written and whether expressed or implied) of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, including, but not limited to, any rights to any severance and/or change in control benefits set forth in Executive’s original offer letter or any prior change in control agreement. No waiver, alteration, or modification of any of the provisions of this Agreement will be binding unless it is in a writing that specifically mentions this Agreement and that is signed by Executive and by an authorized officer of the Company (other than Executive).

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 issuance of PRSUs (and the shares of Common Stock underlying the PRSUs) pursuant to this Agreement shall be subject to, and shall comply with, any applicable requirements of any foreign and U.S. federal and state securities laws, rules and regulations (including, without limitation, the provisions of the Securities Act and the Exchange Act and in each case any respective rules and regulations promulgated thereunder) and any other law or regulation applicable thereto. The Company shall not be obligated to issue PRSUs or any of the shares of Common Stock pursuant to this Agreement if any such issuance would violate any such requirements.

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: or entity. See Grantham v. Blount, Inc., 683 So.2d 538, 541 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1996) (stating ssenKrupp or any other defendant. B. A “John Doe” Petition Does Not Toll Limitations As To An Unknown Defendant. Because “John Doe” was not a misnomer for ThyssenKrupp or any other defendant, Riston named an unknown defendant. ThyssenKrupp asserts that a petition which fails to identify the defendant does not toll limitations. We agree for several reasons. 1. No Texas Statute Generally Authorizes A “John Doe” Petition To Toll Limitations As To An Unknown Defendant. The Texas Legislature has not generally authorized a plaintiff to initiate suit and toll limitations by suing an unknown defendant as “John Doe” or any other fictitious name. See Maury v. Turner, 244 S.W. 809, 812 (Tex.Com.App.1922) (<HOLDING>); see also Grantham, 683 So.2d at 540-41 Options: A. recognizing there is no authority to proceed against unknown persons in the absence of statute B. holding that there is no spousal exception to the statute C. recognizing the legitimacy of a passon defense in the absence of any statute D. holding that there is no right of recovery against individual defendants under the ada E. holding where there is no duty to defend there is no duty to indemnify

assistant: The best answer is A. recognizing there is no authority to proceed against unknown persons in the absence of statute
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: There are no Proceedings pending or, to Seller’s Knowledge, threatened against or affecting Seller or otherwise with respect to the Business or the Purchased Assets at law or in equity. Neither Seller nor the Business is subject to any outstanding order, judgment or decree issued by any Governmental Authority.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The obligations of Borrowers under Sections 2.2(f), 2.2(g), 2.2(h), 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 16.5 and 16.9 and the obligations of Lenders under Sections 2.2, 2.15(b), 2.16, 2.18, 2.19, 14.8 and 16.5, shall survive termination of this Agreement and the Other Documents and payment in full of the Obligations (other than contingent indemnification obligations not yet due and payable with respect to which a claim has not yet been asserted).

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except for intercompany transactions expressly permitted under this Agreement, enter into a contract, agreement or transaction with any officer, director, member, manager, guarantor or Affiliate of such Person that is not in the ordinary course of business and on terms and conditions that are intrinsically fair and substantially similar to those that are available on an arm’s length basis with an unrelated third party. The parties acknowledge that transactions made pursuant to and in accordance with the terms and conditions of, the Westmoreland Services Agreement shall not be a violation of this Section 7.08.

assistant: Transactions With Affiliates
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: agreements and do not own their software outright under Regime 1. 19 . Though this court reviews orders imposing Rule 11 sanctions for an abuse of discretion, “[a] district court would necessarily abuse its discretion if it based its ruling on an erroneous view of the law_" Giebelhaus, 938 F.2d at 964 (quoting Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 405, 110 S.Ct. 2447, 2461, 110 L.Ed.2d 359 (1990)). 20 . The Court extended this reasoning in Business Guides to apply the certification requirement of Rule 11 to represented parties who sign court papers, even where they are not required to do so. 498 U.S. at 543, 546-47, 111 S.Ct. at 930-31. 21 . Giebelhaus, 938 F.2d at 965; see also Pony Express Courier Corp. of Am. v. Pony Express Delivery Serv., 872 F.2d 317, 319 (9th Cir.1989) (<HOLDING>). Southeastern’s argument that Lederman and Options: A. holding appellant could not obtain a new trial so that jury could answer liability question because the charge instructed the jury not to answer the question based on its answer to a prior question and because appellant did not object to this instruction B. holding that a city could not be held vicariously liable for the act of a magistrate who was immune from liability C. holding that individual defendants may not be held liable for violations under title vii D. holding that no judgment can be rendered against defendant who cannot be held liable E. holding that cocounsel who did not sign the answer could not be held liable under rule 11 for its contents

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that cocounsel who did not sign the answer could not be held liable under rule 11 for its contents
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 from class counsel on the risks and potential value of the litigation;” the “contingency, novelty and difficulty” of the case; and “the skill shown by counsel”). “As always, when determining attorneys’ fees, the district court [is] guided by the fundamental principle that fee awards out of common funds be reasonable under the circumstances.” Glass v. UBS Fin. Servs., Inc., 2007 WL 221862, *14 (N.D.Cal.2007), aff'd, 331 Fed.Appx. 452 (9th Cir.2009) (internal quotation marks and emphasis omitted). 1.The Result Obtained for the Class. “The result achieved is a significant factor to be considered in making a fee award.” In re Heritage Bond Litig., 2005 WL 1594403, *19 (C.D.Cal.2005); see Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 436, 103 S.Ct. 1933, 1941, 76 L.Ed.2d 40 (1983) (<HOLDING>). As the court previously found, the settlement Options: A. holding that the most critical factor is the degree of success obtained B. holding that the standard for permanent injunction is the same as that for preliminary injunction with the one exception being that the plaintiff must show actual success on the merits rather than likelihood of success C. holding that status as a prevailing party does not by itself entitle a plaintiff to attorneys fees rather the most critical factor in determining a fee awards reasonableness is the degree of success obtained emphasis added D. holding that the quantity of relief obtained as compared to what the plaintiff sought to achieve are key elements in determining the degree of success E. recognizing that the third factor permanence is the most important

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the most critical factor is the degree of success 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: entities like GasPlus. See generally S. Rep. 106-150 at 5, 7, 10. And GasPlus’s interests were clearly regulated by the BIA’s decision to void the Management Agreement. Indeed, GasPlus’s basic argument in this lawsuit is that the BIA has imposed a greater burden on GasPlus (and the Nambe Pueblo) than what Congress intended when it amended Section 81. The prudential standing test, which “is not meant to be especially demanding,” Clarke v. Sec. Indus. Assoc., 479 U.S. 388, 399, 107 S.Ct. 750, 93 L.Ed.2d 757 (1987), is therefore satisfied. The other standing requirements are also satisfied. GasPlus has suffered an injury in fact: namely, the loss of its rights and benefits arising from the Management Agreement. See, e.g., Idaho Power Co. v. F.E.R.C., 312 F.3d 454, 460 (D.C.Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). The causation requirement is satisfied Options: A. holding a deviation from the terms of a contract constitutes an impairment of contract B. holding that even though an executive order mandating agency consideration of environmental justice concerns created no private right of action for an agencys failure to comply with that mandate the court would review the agencys action as an exercise of discretion under the apa and nepa C. holding that the evidence must be sufficient to support the agencys findings of fact and that the agencys inferences from those facts must be reasonable D. holding that an agencys interference with a private partys contract rights constitutes an injury in fact E. holding that potential loss of a contract constitutes irreparable injury

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an agencys interference with a private partys contract rights constitutes an injury in fact
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: to the extent the parties are permitted under these terms to initiate litigation in a court , both you and headspace agree that all claims and disputes arising out of or relating to the terms or the use of the products will be litigated exclusively in the united states district court for the central district of california .

assistant: 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: therefore , you are not allowed to re-sell , deep-link , use , copy , monitor ( e.g. spider , scrape ) , display , download or reproduce any content or information , software , reservations , tickets , products or services available on our platform for any commercial or competitive activity or purpose .

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: Each payment of the Guaranteed Obligations will be made by each Loan Guarantor without withholding for any Taxes, unless such withholding is required by law. If any Loan Guarantor determines, in its sole discretion exercised in good faith, that it is so required to withhold Taxes, then such Loan Guarantor may so withhold and shall timely pay the full amount of withheld Taxes to the relevant Governmental Authority in accordance with applicable law. If such Taxes are Indemnified Taxes, then the amount payable by such Loan Guarantor shall be increased as necessary so that, net of such withholding (including such withholding applicable to additional amounts payable under this Section), the Administrative Agent or Lender (as the case may be) receives the amount it would have received had no such withholding been made.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: stepfather was emboldened by a sense of impunity to kill T.F. In fact, we do not even know whether T.F.’s stepfather knew that anyone was aware of the abuse, let alone that Arnold determined that an investigation was unnecessary. T.F.’s death was a tragedy. Although we are appalled by the sinister acts that led to his death, it was Engler’s role, as T.F.’s representative, to present us with all of the facts that support his constitutional claim against Arnold. Plaintiffs who seek to hold state officials constitutionally liable on a “failure-to-protect” claim face a high burden under DeShaney. Engler’s complaint falls far short. An assertion of a failure to act does not support a state-ereated-dan-ger theory, and we may not presume facts not presented. See Kottmyer, 436 F.3d at 689 (<HOLDING>). Because Engler’s complaint fails to state Options: A. holding that for purposes of a class certification motion the court must accept as true all factual allegations in the complaint and may draw reasonable inferences therefrom B. holding that in the absence of an adverse credibility determination the court must accept petitioners testimony as true C. holding that the court need not accept as true unwarranted factual inferences D. holding that a court need not accept as true conclusory allegations which are contradicted by documents referred to in the complaint E. holding that a court is not bound to accept as a true legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation and should disregard mere conclusory statements

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the court need not accept as true unwarranted factual inferences
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: “Information” means any and all confidential information or data exchanged, submitted or otherwise disclosed in respect of or further to the Purpose or prepared for or in relation to the Purpose, including but not limited to written Submission documentation, due diligence materials, contractual documentation, reports, and the fact that the Parties have entered into this Agreement and are discussing and considering a business relationship; Other than as set out in this clause, none of the Parties will make any public announcements, statements or otherwise publicise the subject matter of this Agreement (or its existence) without the prior written consent of the other Parties and no Party will use the business names or trade marks of any other Party in any way without that Party’s prior written consent.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The obligations of Guarantor under this Guaranty shall continue in full force and effect until the obligations under the Loan Documents shall have been fully paid and performed and the period of time has expired during which any payment made by Borrower or Guarantor to Lender may be determined to be a Preferential Payment.

assistant: Terms
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 shall have the right to be represented by counsel that it selects in any legal proceedings or other action instituted under Sections 10.2.1(a)(iii) or (iv) or 10.2.1(b) by the other Party. If a Party with the right to initiate legal proceedings under Section 10.2.1 regarding an Infringement lacks standing to do so and the other Party has standing to initiate such legal proceedings, then the Party with standing shall initiate such legal proceedings at the request and expense of the other Party.

assistant: Representations
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 understands and agrees that in the event Employee violates any provision of this Agreement, including the provisions set forth in Paragraphs 5, 6, or 8, then (a) the Company shall have the right to apply for and receive an injunction to restrain any violation of this Agreement; (b) the Company shall have the right to immediately discontinue any enhanced benefit provided under this Agreement; (c) Employee will be obligated to reimburse the Company its cost and expenses incurred in defending Employee’s lawsuit and enforcing this Agreement, including the Company’s court costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees; and (d) as an alternative to (c), at the Company’s option, Employee shall be obligated upon demand to repay the Company the cost of all but $500 of the enhanced benefits paid under this Agreement. Employee acknowledges and agrees that the covenants contained in this Paragraph 9 shall not affect the validity of this Agreement and shall not be deemed to be a penalty or forfeiture. The remedies available to the Company pursuant to this Paragraph 9 are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any remedies which may be available under statutory and/or common law relating to trade secrets and the protection of the Company’s business interest generally.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Term (as defined below), the Company shall employ Executive, and Executive shall be employed, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company. During Executive’s employment with the Company, Executive shall do and perform all services and acts necessary or advisable to fulfill the duties and responsibilities as are commensurate and consistent with Executive’s position and shall render such services on the terms set forth herein. During Executive’s employment with the Company, Executive shall report directly to the Chief Executive Officer of the Company (the “ CEO ”). Executive shall have such powers and duties with respect to the Company as may reasonably be assigned to Executive by the CEO, to the extent consistent with Executive’s position. Executive agrees to devote all of Executive’s working time, attention and efforts to the Company and to perform the duties of Executive’s position in accordance with the Company’s policies as in effect from time to time. Executive may (i) serve as a director or member of a committee or organization involving no actual or potential conflict of interest with the Company and its Affiliates; (ii) deliver lectures and fulfill speaking engagements; (iii) engage in charitable and community activities; and (iv) invest his personal assets in such form or manner that will not violate this Agreement or require services on the part of Executive in the operation or affairs of the companies in which those investments are made; provided the activities described in clauses (i), (ii), (iii) or (iv) do not materially affect or interfere with the performance of Executive’s duties and obligations to the Company or conflict with such policies as may be adopted from time to time by the Board. Executive’s principal place of employment shall be the Company’s offices located in Miami, Florida.

assistant: Employment
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 Grantors shall reimburse the Administrative Agent for any and all reasonable out‑of‑pocket expenses and internal charges (including reasonable attorneys’, auditors’ and accountants’ fees) paid or incurred by the Administrative Agent in connection with the preparation, execution, delivery, administration, collection and enforcement of this Security Agreement and, to the extent provided in the Credit Agreement, in the audit, analysis, administration, collection, preservation or sale of the Collateral (including the expenses and charges associated with any periodic or special audit of the Collateral). Any and all costs and expenses incurred by the Grantors in the performance of actions required pursuant to the terms hereof shall be borne solely by the Grantors.

assistant: Expenses
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 defendant offers proof that the plaintiffs product was copied from other works or similarly probative evidence as to originality.”). These photographs and artwork reveal that ERG’s costumes are quite similar in appearance to the copyrighted characters the costumes are based on. Accordingly, because Aerostar had offered evidence that ERG’s costumes were “not original but copied from another’s work,” the district court properly held that Aerostar had rebutted the statutory presumption, and the district court properly shifted the burden of proving validity — the threshold issue for copyright infringement lawsuits — back to ERG. See, e.g., Masquerade Novelty, 912 F.2d at 668-69; Carol Barnhart Inc. v. Economy Cover Corp., 773 F.2d 411, 414 (2d Cir.1985); Durham, 630 F.2d at 908-09 (<HOLDING>). B. Copyrights in Derivative Works Having Options: A. recognizing this presumption B. holding that the presumption of validity was rebutted where one look at the plaintiffs allegedly copyrightable figures revealed a complete absence of any originality C. holding that collateral review of the validity of a jury waiver in the absence of a rule 23a writing is not available absent any indication the defendant was prejudiced by the technical error D. holding that an adversecredibility determination was supported where the applicants testimony included at least one internal inconsistency and one omission and the petitioner did not provide corroborating evidence that would have rebutted those inconsistencies and omissions E. recognizing presumption

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the presumption of validity was rebutted where one look at the plaintiffs allegedly copyrightable figures revealed a complete absence of any originality
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: 704(a) of Title is indirect proof of a causal connection between the firing and the activity because it is strongly suggestive of retaliation.”) (citations omitted). Here, the temporal proximity was close. Plaintiff filed her administrative complaint on September 14, 2010, and on September 29, 2010, Rodriguez informed her that she was being demoted. On that same day, plaintiff filed her EEOC complaint and only a few days later, on October 1, 2010, she alleges that a gradual process of demotion and withdrawal of her work functions began that lasted through December of 2010. The two week time 'period between plaintiffs first complaint and the beginning of the adverse employment action is sufficient to establish causation at the prima facie phase. See Calero Cerezo, 355 F.3d at 25-26 (<HOLDING>). Therefore, it is recommended that defendants’ Options: A. holding that onemonth temporal proximity was sufficient to establish causation and noting that the prima facie burden in this context is not an onerous one B. holding that temporal proximity did not support a prima facie case where the employer was contemplating the transfer before it learned of the suit C. holding that close temporal proximity is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of retaliation D. recognizing that a plaintiffs burden in establishing a prima facie case is not onerous E. holding that a temporal proximity of one month between the plaintiffs protected activity and adverse employment action was sufficient to establish a causal connection

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that onemonth temporal proximity was sufficient to establish causation and noting that the prima facie burden in this context is not an onerous one
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: Borrower and ADES hereby certify to Lender that, after giving effect to the amendments and waivers provided herein, Borrower is in full compliance with the provisions of the Loan Agreement, and that no Event of Default will occur as a result of the effects of this Eleventh Amendment.

assistant: No Defaults
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 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES HEREUNDER (INCLUDING ANY CLAIMS SOUNDING IN CONTRACT LAW OR TORT LAW ARISING OUT OF THE SUBJECT MATTER HEREOF AND ANY DETERMINATIONS WITH RESPECT TO POST-JUDGMENT INTEREST) SHALL BE GOVERNED BY, AND SHALL BE CONSTRUED AND ENFORCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH, THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, WITHOUT REGARD TO CONFLICT OF LAWS PRINCIPLES THEREOF THAT WOULD RESULT IN THE APPLICATION OF ANY LAW OTHER THAN THE LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK.

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: of notice in a “major local newspaper”). At the same time, it should not be defined so broadly as to include those who would lack any real interest in commenting on it. To require Aviall to solicit comments from such persons would be to impose the same type of rigid formality that the NCP seeks to avoid. See 55 Fed.Reg. at 8793-94. Similarly, Aviall need only contact those parties who might have a foreseeable interest in commenting on the response action. The NCP does not require, for example, that a private party publish nationwide notice of a response action merely because it is possible that an unknown person living in blic meeting held after plaintiff had already begun an “early and essential step” in remediation process was not meaningful); Pierson Sand, 1996 WL 338624, at *3-*4 (<HOLDING>). It also typically requires that some type of Options: A. holding that public meetings held after implementation of final remedial action were not meaningful and that the only public meetings held before remedial action were not meaningful because they did not discuss selection of remedy B. holding that notice of judgment was insufficient C. holding that public meetings held after implementation of final remedial action were not meaningful D. holding that a notice of deficiency was invalid where it was the second notice mailed for that year and the taxpayer timely petitioned the court as to the first notice E. holding that public meetings were not meaningful where first was held without adequate notice and second was held after remedy was already selected by means of consent judgment

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that public meetings were not meaningful where first was held without adequate notice and second was held after remedy was already selected by means of consent judgment
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 communications hereunder will be in writing and effective only on receipt, and, if sent to the Manager, will be mailed, delivered or telefaxed to the Citigroup Global Markets Inc. General Counsel (fax no.: (646) 291-1469) and confirmed to the General Counsel, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., at 388 Greenwich Street, New York, New York, 10013, Attention: General Counsel; or, if sent to the Company, will be mailed or delivered to it at Tocagen Inc., 4242 Campus Point Court, Suite 500, San Diego, California, 92121 attention of the Legal Department, with a copy sent via email to Karen Deschaine Anderson, Cooley LLP, at kanderson@cooley.com.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: except as expressly provided in the terms , nothing in the terms grants you a right or license to use any ua content , including any content owned or controlled by any of our partners or other third parties .

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: Set forth on Schedule 4.19 of the Company Disclosure Letter is a true, correct and complete list of all material insurance policies held by the Company or any of its Subsidiaries as of the date of this Agreement (collectively, the “ Material Company Insurance Policies ”). Each of the Material Company Insurance Policies is in full force and effect on the date of this Agreement and a true, correct and complete copy of each Material Company Insurance Policy has been made available to Rice upon Rice’s request prior to the date of this Agreement. All premiums payable under the Material Company Insurance Policies prior to the date of this Agreement have been duly paid to date. As of the date of this Agreement, no written notice of cancellation or termination has been received with respect to any Material Company Insurance Policy.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: in the event that you become disabled ( such that you are unable to use the services of tinder ) before the end of your subscription period , you shall be entitled to a refund of that portion of any payment you had made for your subscription which is allocable to the period after your disability by providing the company notice in the same manner as you request a refund as described below .

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: language controls.”). 10 . Neither party in this case, nor the Superior Court, was able to locate any legislative history regarding the General Assembly's intent in enacting 16 Del. C. § 6636. 11 . 21 Del. C. § 4802(i) (2004) (“Failure to wear or use an occupant protection system shall not be considered as evidence....”). 12 . 21 Del. C. § 4803(d) (2004) ("A violation of this section shall not be considered as evidence ... nor shall failure to wear a child passenger restraint system...."). 13 . 21 Del. C. § 4198K(e) (2004) ("Failure to wear a bicycle helmet as herein described shall not be considered evidence.... ”). 14 . Appellee's Am. Answering Brief at 6. 15 . See Norfleet v. Mid-Atlantic Realty Co., Civ. A. No. 95C-11-008, 2001 WL 695547, at *2 (Del.Super.Ct. Apr. 20, 2001) (<HOLDING>). 16 . The plaintiffs cite two cases to support Options: A. holding that a plaintiffs failure to invoke 1983 is fatal to the claim because the constitutional provision that was allegedly violated does not itself create a means for recovery for a violation of that provision B. holding that under rico plaintiff must prove an injury because of violation of statute C. holding that a provision of the constitution is to be construed in the sense in which it was understood by the framers and the people at the time of its adoption but that if new products or circumstances that did not exist at the time the constitutional provision was enacted fall within the meaning of the provision the constitutional provision applies to them D. holding that a plaintiff could not base a claim on a violation of 16 del c 6634 because of the exclusionary provision in section 6636 which is clear from the text of the statute E. holding that section 16 3 did not apply to the defendants conduct of diverting the labor of city employees to their own purposes because section 16 3 is intended to protect businesses from the unscrupulous practices of prospective customers

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a plaintiff could not base a claim on a violation of 16 del c 6634 because of the exclusionary provision in section 6636 which is clear from the text of the statute
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: verdict was based on this evidence, and was unavoidably entangled with the religious doctrine introduced into evidence by the state. Further, we conclude that the error resulting from this entanglement was not harmless. Therefore, we hold that the appropriate remedy is to reverse Bussmann’s convictions and remand this case to the district court for a new trial that does not entangle the court and religion. See In re Welfare of M.P.Y., 630 N.W.2d 411, 418-19 (Minn.2001). Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for a new trial. 1 . E.g., United States v. Hensley, 469 U.S. 221, 228, 105 S.Ct. 675, 83 L.Ed.2d 604 (1985) (discussing application of a Terry stop in the context of ongoing crimes and completed crimes); Kilcoyne — S.W.3d —, 2006 WL 2699903, at *4 (Sept. 21, 2006) (<HOLDING>). 3 . Under Minn.Stat. § 609.344, consent is Options: A. holding that courier is not in position of trust B. holding that where the first amendment does not protect a certain activity there can be no first amendment right of association to engage in that activity C. holding that co conspirators cannot be held responsible for another member of the conspiracys abuse of a position of trust under section 3b13 of the guidelines D. holding that member of clergy had no liberty interest to engage in sexual activity through abuse of his position of trust and authority E. holding defendants prior conviction for assault related to sexual abuse of a minor even though it did not require an act of sexual abuse because it required intent to commit sexual abuse and such a mens rea demonstrate the offense was one relating to sexual abuse

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that member of clergy had no liberty interest to engage in sexual activity through abuse of his position of trust and authority