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: ..., and where the effect of such discrimination may be substantially to lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce, or to injure, destroy, or prevent competition with any person who either grants or knowingly receives the benefit of such discrimination, or with customers of either of them.... 15 U.S.C. § 13(a). Plaintiffs’ complaint fails to allege facts that would satisfy the elements of a § 13(a) price discrimination claim. For example, plaintiffs do not allege any facts showing how any of the Individual Defendants’ behavior substantially lessens or injures competition, but rather plaintiffs allege only injury to themselves. In fact, the plaintiffs’ complaint contains none of the all Corp., 509 U.S. 209, 222-24, 113 S.Ct. 2578, 125 L.Ed.2d 168 (1993) (<HOLDING>); see also Black Gold, Ltd. v. Rock0wool Options: A. holding that for a plaintiff to establish primaryline competitive injury resulting from a rivals low prices the plaintiff must show that the prices complained of are below the appropriate measure of the rivals costs and that the rival had a reasonable prospect of recouping its investment in belowcost prices B. holding that to show a causal connection the plaintiff must demonstrate a relationship between the misconduct and the plaintiffs injury C. holding that for a plaintiff to establish secondaryline competitive injury resulting from price discrimination injuring competition among the discriminating sellers customers the plaintiff must show actual competition with that sellers customers D. holding that the plaintiff could not show surprise when the plaintiff had received the additional terms from the defendant prior to the agreement E. holding that in order to establish standing the prospect of obtaining relief from the injury as a result of a favorable ruling must not be too speculative

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that for a plaintiff to establish primaryline competitive injury resulting from a rivals low prices the plaintiff must show that the prices complained of are below the appropriate measure of the rivals costs and that the rival had a reasonable prospect of recouping its investment in belowcost prices
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 Second Amendment may be executed in counterparts (and by different parties and separate counterparts), each of which shall constitute an original, but all of which when taken together shall constitute a single contract. Delivery of an executed counterpart of a signature page to this Second Amendment by telefacsimile or electronic mail or DocuSign shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of this Second Amendment.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The representations and warranties made by the Company in Section 2 of this Agreement shall be true and correct in all material respects when made and shall be true and correct in all material respects on and as of the Closing Date (unless they specifically speak as of another date in which case they shall be true and correct in all material respects as of such date) with the same force and effect as if they had been made on and as of said date.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: costs as elements of loss from the nonprevailing party. Based on these clear, representations of legislative intent from the words utilized, as well as the particular facts of these cases, I conclude that the phrase “any loss” includes the elements of attorney’s fees and costs as provided by statute and included as part of the judgment against a dealer. In Hubbel’s case and the Herberts’ case, the motor vehicle dealers violated at least one of the conditions set forth in section 320.27(10) and, correspondingly, one of the provisions set forth in the surety bonds issued by Aetna became applicable. Specifically, as established by the trial court’s entry of a judgment against the motor vehicle dealer in Hubbel’s case, see, e.g., Ellish v. Richard, 622 So.2d 1154, 1155 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (<HOLDING>), the dealer failed to refund a deposit to Options: A. holding that no actual substantial controversy exists between plaintiff and tortfeasor against whom default judgment has been entered in a subsequent coverage action B. recognizing that the party against whom a default judgment is entered admits all wellpleaded factual allegations as true C. recognizing the courts obligation to assume all factual allegations to be true and to draw all reasonable inferences in plaintiffs favor D. holding that a default judgment was not void because the bankruptcy court that entered the judgment had proper jurisdiction over the party seeking relief E. holding that where the defendant was in default the district court correctly accepted the fact allegations of the complaint as true

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that the party against whom a default judgment is entered admits all wellpleaded factual allegations as true
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: suppressed if: (1) Its exclusion is required by the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of the State of North Carolina; or (2) It is obtained as a result of a substantial violation of the provisions of this Chapter. In determining whether a violation is substantial, the court must consider all the circumstances, including: a. The importance of the particular interest violated; b. The extent of the deviation from lawful conduct; c. The extent to which the violation was willful; d. The extent to which exclusion will tend to deter future violations of this Chapter. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-974 (2009). A review of the circumstances surrounding this action reveals that the detectives tricked and deceived Defendant about the nature of the crime for which he was 3, 471 (2002) (<HOLDING>); State v. Bailey, 145 N.C. App. 13, 19, 548 Options: A. holding that defendant waived his right to selfrepresentation where he told the trial judge before trial that he did not want to represent himself and the public defender acted as counsel for the remainder of trial without objection B. holding that bankruptcy is no exception to the due process principle that one is not bound by a judgment in personam in a litigation in which he is not designated as a party to or to which he has not been made a party by service of process internal quotation marks omitted C. holding that trial court appropriately found that no promises or offers of reward were made where a defendant was told that if he wanted to help himself that he could help himself by cooperating internal quotation marks omitted D. holding that no improper promises were made where an interrogating officer told a defendant that i can tell you that a person who cooperates and shows remorse and is honest and has no criminal background when it goes to court has the best chance of getting the most leniency because he cooperated internal quotation marks omitted E. holding that implicit threats or promises did not render a defendants statement involuntary when a review of the circumstances reveals that the defendants independent will was not overcome so as to induce a confession that he was not otherwise disposed to malee internal quotation marks omitted

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that trial court appropriately found that no promises or offers of reward were made where a defendant was told that if he wanted to help himself that he could help himself by cooperating internal quotation marks omitted
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 Whitehurst the Fifth Circuit applied a de novo standard of review because the parties agreed that the administrator had not been vested with discretionary authority to interpret the Plan. Id. In this case, however, there is no dispute that the Plan Administrator was vested with discretionary authority to interpret the Plan. When a plan administrator has been vested with discretionary authority to interpret a plan, courts review the administrator’s decisions only for abuse of discretion. See Koehler v. Aetna Health, Inc., 683 F.3d 182, 187 (5th Cir.2012). Application of the abuse of discretion standard may involve a two-step process. See Wildbur v. ARCO Chemical Co., 974 F.2d 631, 637 (5th Cir.1992). See also Duhon v. Texaco, Inc., 15 F.3d 1302, 1307-08 & n. 3 (5th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). First, courts may determine if the plan Options: A. holding the lilly analysis is not a sequential twostep process but rather one broad inquiry B. recognizing that the reviewing court is not rigidly confined to wildburs twostep analysis in every case C. holding that sauciers twostep sequence is not mandatory D. holding that the supreme court does not require an evidentiary hearing in every case E. holding that reviewing court may consider trial evidence in reviewing denial of motion to suppress

assistant: The best answer is B. recognizing that the reviewing court is not rigidly confined to wildburs twostep analysis in every case
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: for any “civil action arising under an Act of Congress enacted after the date of the enactment of this section.” 28 U.S.C. § 1658(a). Meanwhile, Congress in 1991 amended § 1981 to remove a bar on claims alleging discriminatory conduct that took place after an employment contract was formed. 42 U.S.C. § 1981(b); see Jones v. R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co., 541 U.S. 369, 372-73, 124 S.Ct. 1836, 158 L.Ed.2d 645 (2004) (explaining that § 1981(b) was added in response to Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164, 109 S.Ct. 2363, 105 L.Ed.2d 132 (1989)). In 2004, the Supreme Court in Jones held that the amendment to § 1981 in turn triggered 28 U.S.C. § 1658(a), and applied a four year statute of limitations to claims arising under § 1981. Jones, 541 U.S. at 374, 382, 124 S.Ct. 1836 (<HOLDING>). Plaintiffs claims plainly allege Options: A. recognizing cause of action B. holding that any action that was made possible by a post1990 enactment carries a fouryear statute of limitations even if not a wholly new cause of action C. holding that the uccs fouryear statute of limitations provision which barred an action by the plaintiff did not bar a thirdparty contribution and indemnity claim D. holding that new uniform fouryear statute of limitations in 28 usc 1658 only applies to lawsuits made possible by post1990 enactments E. recognizing the cause of action

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that any action that was made possible by a post1990 enactment carries a fouryear statute of limitations even if not a wholly new cause of action
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 hereunder will be in writing and sent by certified mail, hand delivery, overnight delivery or fax, if sent to Wainwright, to H. C. Wainwright & Co. LLC, at the address set forth on the first page hereof, e-mail: notices@hcwco.com, Attention: Head of Investment Banking, and if sent to the Company, to the address set forth on the first page hereof, fax number Attention: Chief Executive Officer. Notices sent by certified mail shall be deemed received five days thereafter, notices sent by hand delivery or overnight delivery shall be deemed received on the date of the relevant written record of receipt, and notices delivered by fax shall be deemed received as of the date and time printed thereon by the fax machine.

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 consummation of the share exchanges contemplated hereby (the “Closing”) shall be held at the offices of counsel to the Company on a date and time mutually agreed upon by the parties hereto, but in no event later than August 31, 2016 (the “Closing Date”). The Closing shall be effective as of 12:01 AM local time on the Closing Date.

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: The Parties agree that irreparable damage would occur if any provision of this Agreement was not performed in accordance with its specific terms or was otherwise breached. It is accordingly agreed that the Parties will be entitled to an injunction or injunctions to prevent breaches of this Agreement and to enforce specifically the performance of the terms and provisions of this Agreement without proof of actual damages, this being in addition to any other remedy to which any Party is entitled at Law or in equity. Each Party further agrees that no other Party or any other Person will be required to obtain, furnish or post any bond or similar instrument in connection with or as a condition to obtaining any remedy referred to in this Section 10.12 , and each Party irrevocably waives any right it may have to require the obtaining, furnishing or posting of any such bond or similar instrument.

assistant: Specific Performance
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 Lanham Act need not own a registered trademark. Stanfield v. Osborne Indus., Inc., 52 F.3d 867, 873 (10th Cir.1995). Instead, when a claim is based on a false association claim — as in this case — in order to have standing, the plaintiff must “have a reasonable interest to be protected” such as a plaintiff “with a commercial interest in the product wrongfully identified with another’s mark, ... or with a commercial interest in the misused mark.” Id. (citations omitted). The statute grants standing to “any person who believes that he or she is likely to be damaged” by the prohibited conduct. 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). The Court concludes that this language confers standing on trademark licensees. See, e.g., Quabaug Rubber Co. v. Fabiano Shoe Co., Inc., 567 F.2d 154, 160 (1st Cir.1977) (<HOLDING>). The Second Amended Complaint and Distributor Options: A. holding that defendants incorporation of plaintiffs computer product into its own cdrom product could constitute claim under 15 usc 1125a B. holding that licensee was not estopped from challenging the validity of a trademark C. holding that the statute of limitations for all of plaintiffs eleven causes of action including those brought under lanham act 43a 15 usc 1125a and lanham act 43c 15 usc 1125c is four years D. holding that licensee was not a registrant exclusive licensee or assignee of trademark but still had standing to assert false designation claim under 15 usc 1125a E. holding that assignee of rtc could not assert exemption from tia

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that licensee was not a registrant exclusive licensee or assignee of trademark but still had standing to assert false designation claim under 15 usc 1125a
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 questions concerning the construction, validity, enforcement and interpretation of the Transaction Documents shall be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the internal laws of the State of New York, without regard to the principles of conflicts of law thereof. Each party agrees that all legal Proceedings concerning the interpretations, enforcement and defense of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and any other Transaction Documents (whether brought against a party hereto or its respective affiliates, directors, officers, shareholders, partners, members, employees or agents) shall be commenced exclusively in the state and federal courts sitting in the City of New York. Each party hereby irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts sitting in New York County, New York, for the adjudication of any dispute hereunder or in connection herewith or with any transaction contemplated hereby or discussed herein (including with respect to the enforcement of any of the Transaction Documents), and hereby irrevocably waives, and agrees not to assert in any Action or Proceeding, any claim that it is not personally subject to the jurisdiction of any such court, that such Action or Proceeding is improper or is an inconvenient venue for such Proceeding. Each party hereby irrevocably waives personal service of process and consents to process being served in any such Action or Proceeding by mailing a copy thereof via registered or certified mail or overnight delivery (with evidence of delivery) to such party at the address in effect for notices to it under this Agreement and agrees that such service shall constitute good and sufficient service of process and notice thereof. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to limit in any way any right to serve process in any other manner permitted by law. If any party shall commence an Action or Proceeding to enforce any provisions of the Transaction Documents, then, in addition to the obligations of the Company elsewhere in this Agreement, the prevailing party in such Action or Proceeding shall be reimbursed by the non-prevailing party for its reasonable attorneys’ fees and other costs and expenses incurred with the investigation, preparation and prosecution of such Action or Proceeding.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: treatment in a program certified by the Attorney General at the expense of the defendant pursuant to Section 644 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes. . 7 . Laws 2000, c. 370, § 8, eff. July 1, 2000. 8 . Laws 2005, c. 348, § 16, eff. July 1, 2005. 9 . This is evidenced by the Legislature reinstating the requirement for a fixed period in 1999 after having required from 1987 to 1999 that the protective orders be continuous. Compare Laws 1987, c. 174, § 1(F), eff. July 1, 1987, to Laws 1999, c. 97, § 1(G), eff. Nov. 1, 1999. It was not until 2012 that the Legislature reintroduced the option for continuous protective orders upon a specific finding of a history of domestic abuse. Laws 2012, c. 313, § 1(G)(1)(b), eff. Nov. 1, 2012. See also Sanford, 2016 OK CIV APP 20 at ¶ 25, 370 P.3d 1220 Options: A. recognizing that statutory concern is not limited to acts of violence but also includes the harm to society caused by narcotics trafficking B. holding that the legislature did not intend the basis for a continuous protective order be limited to the four enumerated findings but also to include a finding of a history of domestic violence C. holding expiration of the protective order does not automatically render the matter moot because of heightened public awareness and sensitivity to the existence of domestic violence as well as legitimate public contempt for abusers and enhanced technology for information dissemination D. holding that failure to include right to appeal in statute indicated legislature did not intend to permit appeal from denial of temporary restraining order E. holding no due process violation with respect to hearings for protective orders against domestic abuse

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the legislature did not intend the basis for a continuous protective order be limited to the four enumerated findings but also to include a finding of a history of domestic violence
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Upon (or at any time after) this Lease shall be terminated in respect of any Aircraft and there shall have been paid in full all amounts owing hereunder in respect of such Aircraft, and provided that there shall be no Default Event continuing after giving effect to such payment, the Lessee may direct the Lessor to execute and deliver to or as directed in writing by the Lessee an appropriate instrument or instruments prepared by the Lessee and reasonably satisfactory to the Lessor releasing such Aircraft from the lien of this Lease and the Lessor shall execute and deliver such instruments as aforesaid and give written notice thereof to such Persons as the Lessee may reasonably request.

assistant: Releases
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 record shows DeBrew conferred with a Correctional Counselor at Butner on at least two occasions. On the first occasion, he gave De-Brew a letter explaining it took 16 days for DeBrew to receive the General Counsel’s letter rejecting his first appeal. On the second occasion, DeBrew asked a Correctional Counselor to retrieve a copy of the Regional Director’s response from the Administrative Remedy Index, which she failed to do. The defendants suggest no other way in which DeBrew could have complied with the General Counsel’s requirement that he attach the Regional Director’s response in order to perfect his appeal. Under these circumstances, the remedy of an appeal to the General Counsel simply was not “available” to DeBrew. See Risher v. Lappin, 639 F.3d 236, 240 (6th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>); Dale v. Lappin, 376 F.3d 652, 656 (7th Options: A. holding that because plaintiff no longer has available administrative remedies his action must be dismissed with prejudice B. holding the plaintiff exhausted all available administrative remedies because the bureaus failure to deliver the regional directors response to the plaintiff prevented him from sub mitting that response with his appeal to the general counsel C. 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 D. holding that administrative remedies must be exhausted prior to filing a claim in court E. holding remedy not available to prisoner where officials purportedly prevented plaintiff from employing the prisons administrative remedies

assistant: The best answer is B. holding the plaintiff exhausted all available administrative remedies because the bureaus failure to deliver the regional directors response to the plaintiff prevented him from sub mitting that response with his appeal to the general counsel
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: During the Employment Period, the Executive shall be entitled to all employee benefits and perquisites made available to senior executives of the Company, including, without limitation, group medical, dental, vision, life insurance, long-term disability insurance, retirement, pension, 401(k) savings plans and/or prescription drug plan coverage, subject to the condition that the Executive is eligible for participation in any such plans. The Company shall pay 100% of the premium cost of the Company’s health insurance coverage provided to the Executive (and the Executive’s dependents, if applicable) by the Company from time to time. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall prevent the Company from terminating plans, changing carriers or effecting modifications in employee benefits coverage for the Executive as long as such modifications affect all similarly situated senior executives of the Company.

assistant: Benefits
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: pretenses. Zamora, 811 F.2d at 1370; Zeller v. Samia, 758 F.Supp. 775, 781 (D.Mass.1991); see also Comeaux, 915 F.2d at 1273; Hansen, 582 F.2d at 1219— 20. It is uncontested that defendant requested the credit report in connection with his criminal investigation of Allen. Neither a criminal investigation nor a state grand jury subpoena constitute a permissible purpose to furnish a consumer report under § 1681b. However, it is also uncontested that defendant revealed to Halsey the purpose for which he sought the report. Accordingly, there is no genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendant obtained the report through the use of false pretenses. See Houghton v. New Jersey Manuf. Ins. Co., 615 F.Supp. 299, 306 (D.C.Pa.1985), rev’d. on other grds., 795 F.2d 1144 (3rd Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). Finally, the court notes that Allen has Options: A. holding that it may be decided as a matter of law B. holding as a matter of law that user who disclosed impermissible purpose was not guilty of obtaining information through false pretenses C. holding that the offense requires that the return be false as to a material matter D. holding that unless an affirmative defense is established as matter of law defendant bears burden of obtaining jury findings necessary to support defense E. holding that the defendant did not establish good faith as a matter of law

assistant: The best answer is B. holding as a matter of law that user who disclosed impermissible purpose was not guilty of obtaining information through false pretenses
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 notices required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be given in writing and delivered in person or sent certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the respective parties at such addresses as may hereinafter be designated by such party in writing to other parties.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: and pensions, 45 U.S.C. 288(L); Veterans benefits, 45 U.S.C. 352(E); Special pensions paid to winners of the Congressional Medal of Honor, 38 U.S.C. 3101; and Federal homestead lands on debts contracted before issuance of the patent, 43 U.S.C. 175. S.Rep. No. 95-989, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 75, reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5787, 5861; H.Rep. No. 95-595, 95th Cong.2d Sess. 360 (1977), reprinted in 1978 U.S.C.C.A.N. 5963, 6316. The court in Goff then examined two lower court decisions which had considered the legislative history and had reached “diametrically opposite interpretations of the scope of this provision [§ 522(b)(2)(A) ] relative to ERISA-qualified pension plans.” Goff, 706 F.2d at 583. Those cases were Samore v. Graham (In re Graham), 24 B.R. 305 (Bankr.N.D.Iowa 1982) (<HOLDING>) and Barr v. Hinshaw (In re Hinshaw), 23 B.R. Options: A. holding that the plaintiffs did not fall within the zone of interests protected by the tcpa because they attempted to use the statute in a way not intended or contemplated by congress and because their damages are not of the vexatious and intrusive nuisance nature sought to be redressed by congress in enacting the tcpa B. holding that it is not within the judicial province to give the words used by congress a narrower meaning than they were manifestly intended to bear in order that crimes may be punished which are not described in language that brings them within the constitutional power of that body C. holding that erisaqualified pension plans were not intended by congress to be within the statutory exemption D. holding that the pension plans anticutback language offered more protection than the acts E. holding act qualifies as exemption statute under exemption 3

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that erisaqualified pension plans were not intended by congress to be within the statutory exemption
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: Parent and its subsidiaries each agree that this Commitment Letter and the Fee Letter are for its confidential use only and that neither their existence nor the terms hereof will be disclosed by it to any person other than its subsidiaries and the officers, directors, employees, managers, members, partners, equity holders, accountants, attorneys and other advisors of Parent and its subsidiaries (the “ Borrower Representatives ”), and then only on a confidential and “need to know” basis in connection with the transactions contemplated hereby; provided , that , Parent may disclose this Commitment Letter and the contents hereof and, except to the extent specified below, the Fee Letter and the contents thereof: (a) as may be compelled in (i) a judicial or administrative proceeding or in any proceeding or pursuant to the order of any court or administrative agency or upon the request or demand of any regulatory authority or (ii) as otherwise required by law or in any required filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission and to the extent required by applicable regulatory authorities or stock exchanges (but, with respect to this clause (ii) in the case of the Fee Letter and the contents thereof, only as part of disclosure of aggregate sources and uses with respect to the Transactions); (b) to the Acquired Company and its controlling persons and the officers, directors, employees, managers, members, partners, accountants, attorneys and other advisors of any of the foregoing who are directly involved in the consideration of this matter, in each case on a confidential and “need to know” basis in connection with the transactions contemplated hereby (but in the case of the Fee Letter and the contents thereof, redacted in respect of the amounts, percentages and basis points of compensation set forth therein and the pricing and other terms); (c) in syndication or other marketing materials relating to the ABL Facility (but in the case of the Fee Letter and the contents thereof, only as part of disclosure of aggregate sources and uses with respect to the Transactions) or (d) with the prior written consent of Lead Arrangers. Notwithstanding anything herein, neither Commitment Party is holding Parent or any of its subsidiaries or any other party hereto to any confidentiality obligations with respect to any U.S. federal or state tax material provided, or federal or state tax comments made, by either Commitment Party or any of their affiliates, officers, employees or agents.

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 shall become effective when it shall have been executed by the parties hereto and thereafter shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Borrowers, the Administrative Agent and each Lender and their respective successors and assigns, except that no Borrower shall have the right to assign its rights hereunder or any interest herein without the prior written consent of the Lenders.

assistant: Binding Effects
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: statutory considerations favored dismissal without prejudice. “[T]he district court’s judgment of how opposing considerations balance should not lightly be disturbed.” Taylor, 487 U.S. at 337, 108 S.Ct. 2413. We discern no reason to overturn the district court’s dismissal of the indictment without prejudice. AFFIRMED. 1 . In this appeal, Defendant does not dispute the propriety of trying him jointly with his codefendants. 2 . Although the Supreme Court has never held that a delay attributed to a codefendant must be reasonable in order to exclude that time from a defendant’s speedy trial clock, it has held that subsections of § 3161 may need to be analyzed together before properly excluding a period of delay. See Bloate v. United States, - U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1345, 176 L.Ed.2d 54 (2010) (<HOLDING>). Thus, our circuit’s precedent requiring that Options: A. holding that the time granted to prepare pretrial motions is not automatically excludable under 3161h1 but may be excluded only when a court grants a continuance based on appropriate findings under 3161h7 B. holding that where a defendant acquiesces in a continuance that time is excluded from the speedy trial calculation C. holding that time excluded from a speedy trial clock for pretrial motion preparation is not automatically excluded under 3161h1 but may only be excluded when a court makes appropriate reasonableness findings under 3161h7 D. holding that motion challenging pretrial detention was excludable under act E. holding that time granted for preparing pretrial motions is not automatically excludable under 3161h1 but is excludable only after the district court enters appropriate findings under 3161h7a

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the time granted to prepare pretrial motions is not automatically excludable under 3161h1 but may be excluded only when a court grants a continuance based on appropriate findings under 3161h7
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you have downloaded the app from the apple , inc. ( `` apple '' ) app store or if you are using the app on an ios device , you acknowledge that you have read , understood , and agree to the following notice regarding apple .

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: their eligibility for the HAMP, including in-person contacts at the servicer’s discretion. U.S. Dep’t of Treasury, HAMP Supplemental Directive No. 09-01, at 13-14 (Apr. 6, 2009) (emphasis added) (reproduced at Docs. 37-7, 37-8). Violations of agency directives like these can be a hallmark of unfairness under the ICFA. See 815 ILCS 505/2 (“In construing this section,” which addresses “unfair ... acts or practices,” “consideration shall be given to the interpretation of the Federal Trade Commission and the federal courts relating to Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act”); Robinson, 266 Ill.Dec. 879, 775 N.E.2d at 960-61; Ornelas, 1988 WL 102232, at *1; see also Morris v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P., 775 F.Supp.2d 255, 259-62, 2011 WL 1226974, at *3-6 (D.Mass. Apr. 4, 2011) (<HOLDING>). The complaint alleges not only that Options: A. holding that medical expenses were within meaning of ascertainable loss under that states consumer protection statute B. holding that the most analogous claim for relief under new york law is a claim for employment discrimination C. holding that hamp violations can predicate claim under analogous massachusetts consumer protection statute D. holding that this statute was the most analogous state statute for purposes of erisa action filed in utah E. holding that the colorado consumer protection act allowed suit against agents as individuals

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that hamp violations can predicate claim under analogous massachusetts consumer protection 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: nullifying a bargained-for contract provision,, namely coverage for potential legal liability, by means of a prior breach of its duty to defend. 2. Application In Kentucky, the interpretation of an insurance contract is a question of law for the Court to decide. Kemper Nat’l Ins. Cos. v. Heaven Hill Distilleries, Inc., 82 S.W.3d 869, 871 (Ky.2002); see also Caudill Seed & Warehouse Co., Inc. v. Houston Cas. Co., 835 F.Supp.2d 329, 332 (W.D.Ky.2011). Unless there is an ambiguity, “a written' instrument will be enforcéd strictly according to its terms, and a court will interpret a contract’s terms by assigning language its ordinary meaning and without resort to extrinsic evidence.” Frear, 103 S.W.3d at 106; see also York v. Ky. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 156 S.W.3d 291, 293 (Ky.2005) (<HOLDING>). If, however, a contract is susceptible to Options: A. holding that the clear and unambiguous words of an insurance contract should be given their plain and ordinary meaning B. holding that an appellate court must give a statute its clear and plain meaning when the statute is unambiguous C. holding that statutory words must be given their ordinary contemporary meaning D. recognizing that where the statutory language is not ambiguous the plain and ordinary meaning of the statute must be given effect E. holding that we must give the words in statutes their plain and ordinary meaning

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the clear and unambiguous words of an insurance contract should be given their plain and ordinary meaning
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: As of the Closing Date, neither Holdings nor any other Loan Party has any Subsidiaries other than those specifically disclosed in Schedule 5.12 , and all of the outstanding Equity Interests in Holdings, the Borrowers and the Material Subsidiaries have been validly issued and are fully paid and nonassessable, and all Equity Interests owned by Holdings or any other Loan Party are owned free and clear of all security interests of any Person except (i) those created under the Collateral Documents or under the CF Facility Documentation or the Priority Guarantee Notes Documentation in accordance with the Intercreditor Agreement, (ii) any nonconsensual Lien that is permitted under Section 7.01 and (iii) those created pursuant to the DIP Order. As of the Closing Date, Schedule 5.12 (a) sets forth the name and jurisdiction of each Subsidiary, (b) sets forth the ownership interest of Holdings, the Parent Borrower and any other Subsidiary in each Subsidiary, including the percentage of such ownership and (c) identifies each Subsidiary that is a Subsidiary the Equity Interests of which are required to be pledged pursuant to the Collateral and Guarantee Requirement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: offered not by the defendant ... but by a third party who shares access to the ... object being searched.” Glenn, 275 Va. at 130, 654 S.E.2d at 913. The person authorizing the search can be one with either actual or apparent authority. Id. at 132, 654 S.E.2d at 914. Actual authority exists where the third party has “(1) mutual use of the property by virtue of joint acces[] or (2) control for most purposes.” Id. (quoting United States v. Andrus, 483 F.3d 711, 716 (10th Cir.2007)). However, the mere fact that a container owned by one person is located on residential premises belonging to or under the control of another does not mean that the person in charge of the premises has actual authority to consent to a search of the container. Compare id. at 129, 133, 654 S.E.2d at 912, 915 (<HOLDING>), with Frazier v. Cupp, 394 U.S. 731, 740, 89 Options: A. holding that where a container belonged exclusively to the defendant who lived on particular premises with the owners permission the owner of the premises did not have actual authority to consent to a search of the container B. holding that the defendant who owned the premises could discharge its duty by either warning the plaintiff or making the premises reasonably safe C. holding that while a lawfully issued warrant to search premises authorizes the officers executing it to search in a reasonable manner whatever spots within the described premises their professional experience indicates may be used as a cache for the items named in the warranty such a warrant does not by its own force permit a search of the persons residents or visitorswho chance to be at the premises at the time the warrant is executed or belongings of a nonresident visitor present on the premises D. recognizing that a search incident to a lawful arrest permits a law enforcement officer to conduct a warrantless search of a container located in the area of the arrestees immediate control E. holding that consent to search premises includes consent to search washing machine on those premises

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that where a container belonged exclusively to the defendant who lived on particular premises with the owners permission the owner of the premises did not have actual authority to consent to a search of the container
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you acknowledge , consent and agree that yahoo may access , preserve and disclose your account information and content if required to do so by law or in a good faith belief that such access preservation or disclosure is reasonably necessary to : ( i ) comply with legal process ; ( ii ) enforce the tos ; ( iii ) respond to claims that any content violates the rights of third parties ; ( iv ) respond to your requests for customer service ; or ( v ) protect the rights , property or personal safety of yahoo , its users and the public .

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: regarding the Marshals’ advance notice requirement did not, standing alone, provide the court with a basis upon which to grant a continuance under § 3161(h)(3). Compare United States v. Burrell, 634 F.3d 284, 292 (5th Cir.2011) (per curiam) (concluding the essential witness exclusion could not apply where the government failed to present any evidence showing its witness’s presence could not be obtained through reasonable efforts) and United States v. Ferguson, 574 F.Supp.2d 111, 115 (D.D.C.2008) (concluding an exclusion of time under § 3161(h)(3) was not warranted where the government failed to present any evidence to support its claim the Marshals were unable to transport two of its witnesses in time for trial) with United States v. Patterson, 277 F.3d 709, 711-12 (4th Cir.2002) (<HOLDING>). After concluding the district court violated Options: A. holding the district court did not err in granting a continuance where the government presented testimony from a deputy marshal describing the hardship it would work on the agency B. holding that trial court did not err C. holding that the district court did not err in instructing the jury not to draw any adverse inferences from the governments failure to call a witness because the witness did not have a relationship with the government such that one would expect him to give testimony in favor of the government D. holding that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment to county on monell claim where plaintiff presented no evidence that similar conduct occurred in the past E. holding that the trial court did not err by granting defendants motion for summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding the district court did not err in granting a continuance where the government presented testimony from a deputy marshal describing the hardship it would work on the agency
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 recipient is subject to tax in the U.S., t he value of the Award as of the Vesting Date will be subject to FICA withholding in that same calendar year. If recipient is responsible for a Tax-Related Item in a country outside the U.S. (“Foreign Country”) and if pursuant to the rules regarding such Tax-Related Item in such Foreign Country, recipient will be liable for such Tax-Related Item prior to the date that recipient is issued shares pursuant to this Award, the Committee, in its discretion, may accelerate vesting and settlement of a portion of the Award to the extent necessary to pay the foreign Tax-Related Items due (and any applicable U.S. income taxes due as a result of the acceleration of vesting and settlement) but only if such acceleration does not result in taxation under Section 409A (as permitted under Treasury Regulation Section 1.409A-3(j)(4)(xi)).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The parties recognize that various other rights rendered under this Agreement are unique and, accordingly, the parties shall, in addition to such other remedies as may be available to them at law or in equity, have the right to enforce the rights under this Agreement by actions for injunctive relief and specific performance.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: you are not allowed to sublicense , trade , sell or attempt to sell in-game virtual items for `` real '' money , or exchange virtual items for value of any kind outside of a game .

assistant: None