flwrlabs/fed-legal huggingface dataset:
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The certificate, advice, receipt or bill of the appropriate official designated by law to make or issue the same or to receive payment of any Imposition, or of non-payment of such Imposition shall be prima facie evidence that such Imposition is due and unpaid or has been paid at the time of the making or issuance of such certificate, advice, receipt or bill.

assistant: Miscellaneous
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' entered summary judgment against him. We review that decision de novo. See McIndoe v. Huntington Ingalls Inc., 817 F.3d 1170, 1173 (9th Cir. 2016). II The First Amendment, applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibits the- government from “abridgirig the freedom of speech.” U.S. Const. amend. I; Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359, 368, 51 S.Ct. 532, 75 L.Ed. 1117 (1931) (incorporating “the right of free speech” into the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment). Content-based restrictions on judicial-campaign speech are subject to strict scrutiny under the First Amendment. See Republican Party of Minn. v. White (“White I”), 536 U.S. 765, 774, 122 S.Ct. 2528, 153 L.Ed.2d 694 (2002) (assuming strict scrutiny applies); Wolfson, 811 F.3d at 1180 (<HOLDING>). To survive strict scrutiny, the government Options: A. holding that strict scrutiny applies B. holding that turner did not cast doubt on the courts previous holding that strict scrutiny applies to racial classifications in prisons C. holding that strict scrutiny applies to a prior restraint enforcing a contentbased restriction on speech in a traditional public forum D. holding that some form of heightened constitutional scrutiny applies E. recognizing that strict scrutiny applies to facial discrimination against a suspect class

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that strict scrutiny applies
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 court’s failure to hold such a hearing. Moreover, although the Estate does not maintain that it was not given an opportunity to respond to the motion to dismiss, we reiterate that the motion was pending for over two-and-a-half months before the trial court issued its ruling, and so long as the party opposing the motion to dismiss has an opportunity to respond on the record, no hearing is required. See Mitchell v. 3280 Peachtree 1, LLC, 285 Ga. 576, 576 (1) (678 SE2d 880) (2009) (affirming the trial court’s grant of a motion to dismiss when it did not hold an oral hearing on the motion because the appellant was given “ample notice and opportunity to respond” to the motion such that his due process rights were not violated); Grant v. Kooby, 310 Ga. App. 483, 486 (713 SE2d 685) (2011) (<HOLDING>); Lemmons v. Newton, 269 Ga. App. 880, 882 (605 Options: A. holding the trial court was without authority to dismiss an appeal on the ground that the amount of the judgment required the appellant to file an application for discretionary review B. holding that a motion to continue a hearing on a postjudgment motion was ineffective to extend the period for the trial court to rule on the motion absent the express consent of the parties C. holding that a hearing on a motion to dismiss an appeal is not required if the parties are given an opportunity to respond on the record D. holding that the trial court did not violate due process in considering the defendants motion to dismiss because the defendant had corrected its error in not serving its motion to dismiss on the plaintiff and because the plaintiff had received adequate time to consider and respond to the arguments made in the motion E. holding that the trial court did not err by failing to hold an oral hearing on a motion to dismiss an appeal because the appellant was afforded a full opportunity to respond to the motion

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a hearing on a motion to dismiss an appeal is not required if the parties are given an opportunity to respond on the record
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: scheme, an Oklahoma capital sentencing jury's finding of any particular aggravating circumstance does not of itself "convict” a defendant and require the death penalty, and its failure to find any particular aggravating circumstance does not "acquit” a defendant and preclude the death penalty. 20 . The dissent acknowledges that Hogan can prevail only if this Court declines to follow Poland. 21 . The dissent misconstrues our holdings in Crawford v. State, 1992 OK CR 62, 840 P.2d 627, 640-41, Cheney v. State, 1995 OK CR 72, 909 P.2d 74, and Perry v. State, 1995 OK CR 20, 893 P.2d 521, 533-37, and misunderstands the Satta-zahn distinction between a jury’s non-finding of an aggravating circumstance and an acquittal on the merits of murder plus aggravating circumstances th 556 (2002) (<HOLDING>). Hogan’s aggravators were tried to a jury, not Options: A. holding that if the existence of any fact increases the maximum punishment that may be imposed on a defendant that fact constitutes an element that must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt B. holding that if the imposition of the death penalty depends on the existence of aggravating factors a jury must find those factors beyond a reasonable doubt C. holding that under the sixth amendment any fact which increases the penalty for a crime eg by triggering a mandatory minimum sentence must be found by the jury beyond a reasonable doubt D. holding that sixth amendment requires that a jury not a judge find the existence of any aggravating circumstance and that they be found beyond a reasonable doubt E. holding that a sentencing judge sitting without a jury may not find an aggravating circumstance necessary for imposition of the death penalty

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that sixth amendment requires that a jury not a judge find the existence of any aggravating circumstance and that they be found beyond a reasonable doubt
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: supplemental terms may apply to certain services , such as policies for a particular event , activity or promotion , and such supplemental terms will be disclosed to you in connection with the applicable services .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: As mentioned above, he would first fill the jury box, then excuse jurors for cause, and replace them with jurors next in line. Hr’g Tr. vol. 1 at 26-27. This method results in spectator benches being emptied sequentially from front to back. Thus had spectators been allowed back into the courtroom, they could have been seated in empty benches in front of the remaining venirepersons, rather than “among” the venire. Spectators might, therefore, have filled those benches, bench by bench, sitting no closer to the venire than the bench occupied by Mrs. Bucci, Mrs. Keefe, and Mrs. Jordan. Still, admitting spectators bench by bench as benches became vacant would greatly have increased the risk of inappropriate interaction between the venire and the spectators. Moreover A.2d 968 (1994) (<HOLDING>); Davidson v. State, 591 So.2d 901, 902-903 Options: A. holding that it was unreasonable for officers to break down doors that they already knew were open B. holding that the defendant is not entitled to be sentenced by the judge who took his plea when the judge made no promise to sentence him C. holding that no closure occurred where judge locked doors to ensure jury would not be distracted D. holding that it would not be unreasonable to find condition in hotel lunchroom unsafe because invitee would be distracted E. holding that no closure occurred when judge did not allow anyone to enter or leave courtroom during jury instructions

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that no closure occurred where judge locked doors to ensure jury would not be distracted
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: preliminary hearing. 16 Garner v. State, 116 Nev. 770, 783, 6 P.3d 1013, 1022 (2000), overruled on other grounds by Sharma v. State, 118 Nev. 648, 56 P.3d 868 (2002). 17 See Gallego v. State, 117 Nev. 348, 365, 23 P.3d 227, 239 (2001). 18 Weber v. State, 121 Nev. 554, 580, 119 P.3d 107, 125 (2005) (quoting Leonard, 117 Nev. at 65, 17 P.3d at 405), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 1216 (2006); see also NRS 175.036(1). 19 Hall v. State, 89 Nev. 366, 371, 513 P.2d 1244, 1247 (1973). 20 See id. at 370-71, 513 P.2d at 1247 (concluding that the fact that a juror was the victim of a burglary did not require removal of a juror whose voir dire answers demonstrated she was unbiased). 21 Grooms v. State, 96 Nev. 142, 144, 605 P.2d 1145, 1146 (1980); see also Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501, 504-05 (1976) (<HOLDING>). 22 Hymon v. State, 121 Nev. 200, 207-08, 111 Options: A. holding that state cannot consistent with due process and equal protection require an accused to stand trial while wearing identifiable prison clothes B. holding that the due process and equal protection clauses do not trigger tucker act jurisdiction in the courts C. holding that neither the due process clause nor the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment require the appointment of counsel on a petition for discretionary review to a state supreme court D. holding that florida statute did not constitute an unreasonable exercise of the states police power and rejecting due process and equal protection challenges E. holding that the state law violated equal protection principles

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that state cannot consistent with due process and equal protection require an accused to stand trial while wearing identifiable prison clothes
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 beyond what he already did supply, and his confusion in response to several questions on cross-examination, as reasons for rejecting his testimony. An applicant’s failure to list in his or her initial application facts that emerge later in testimony will not automatically provide a sufficient basis for an adverse credibility finding. “Inconsistencies of less than substantial importance for which a plausible explanation is offered cannot form the sole basis for an adverse credibility finding.” Campos-Sanchez v. INS, 164 F.3d 448, 450 (9th Cir.1999) (internal quotation and alteration omitted). This is especially so when the inconsistencies do not concern the basis for the claim of asylum or withholding, but rather matters collateral or ancillary to the claim. Gao, 299 P.3d at 272 (<HOLDING>); Diallo, 232 F.3d at 288 (holding that minor Options: A. holding that minor discrepancies that do not involve the heart of the asylum claim are not an adequate basis for an adverse credibility finding B. holding that omissions in petitioners asylum application which go to the heart of the claim support adverse credibility finding C. holding that ij properly based adverse credibility finding on omission in asylum application where omitted fact went to the heart of the asylum claim citation omitted D. holding that inconsistencies in the aliens statements must go to the heart of the asylum claim to justify an adverse credibility finding E. holding that minor discrepancies in the date of an aliens graduation from high school as compared to the date of a beating did not justify an adverse credibility finding

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that minor discrepancies that do not involve the heart of the asylum claim are not an adequate basis for an adverse credibility finding
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: Receipt by the Administrative Agent of a copy of (i) the annual consolidated financial statements (including balance sheets, income statements and cash flow statements) of the Borrower and its Subsidiaries for Fiscal Years 2015 and 2016, audited by independent public accountants of recognized national standing, (ii) the consolidated balance sheet, income statement, and statement of cash flows of the Borrower and its Subsidiaries for the Fiscal Quarter ended March 31, 2017 and (iii) such other financial information regarding the Borrower as the Administrative Agent may reasonably request. The Administrative Agent acknowledges that the items described in clauses (i) and (ii) above have been posted on the Borrower’s website at the website address listed on Schedule 11.1 and are therefore deemed to have been received by the Administrative Agent.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Purchaser agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the Company harmless against any liability, costs or expenses arising as a result of any dissemination of any of the Securities by Purchaser in violation of the Securities Act or applicable state securities law.

assistant: Indemnifications
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 provisions set forth in this Section 12 shall apply to this Agreement, as well as all other Transaction Documents and Additional Investment Documents as if these terms were fully set forth therein; provided, however , that in the event there is a conflict between any provision set forth in this Section 12 and any provision in any other Transaction Document, the provision in such other Transaction Document shall govern.

assistant: Miscellaneous
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: Amendment claim is dismissed with prejudice. The Fourteenth Amendment claim is significantly more difficult to resolve. White claims that Rotkvich violated the Due Process Clause by fabricating evidence of his (supposed) guilt. The claim is called a “Whitlock claim” because in Whitlock v. Brueggemann, 682 F.3d 567 (7th Cir.2012), the Seventh Circuit held that “a police officer who manufactures false evidence against a criminal defendant violates due process if that evidence is later used to deprive the defendant of her liberty in some way.” Id. at 580. Significantly for present purposes, the two plaintiffs in Whitlock had been convicted at trial and spent 17 and 21 years in prison before their release. Id. at 570; see also Fields v. Wharrie, 740 F.3d 1107, 1109, 1113 (7th Cir.2014) (<HOLDING>). In Saunders-El v. Rohde, 778 F.3d 556 (7th Options: A. holding that a plaintiff who alleged that he was convicted and imprisoned on the strength of fabricated evidence stated a whitlock claim B. holding that plaintiff who alleged discrimination on the basis of his mexicanamerican descent had stated a valid claim under section 1981 C. holding plaintiff stated claim in his individual capacity D. holding that plaintiff stated a claim for breach of contract when it alleged the government failed to purchase insurance for plaintiff as agreed by contract E. holding that the plaintiff stated a claim for tortious interference

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a plaintiff who alleged that he was convicted and imprisoned on the strength of fabricated evidence stated a whitlock claim
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: (a) On the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in this Agreement, subject to Section 2.01(b) , the Investor shall purchase and acquire from the Company an aggregate of the lesser of (i) 150,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock and (ii) a number of shares of Series A Preferred Stock that equals (on an as-converted basis) 19.99% of the outstanding shares of the Company’s Common Stock at the time of Closing and, to the extent the number of shares of Series A Preferred Stock purchased by the Investor is less than 150,000, an aggregate number of shares of Series B Preferred Stock equal to the difference between 150,000 and the number of shares of Series A Preferred Stock purchased by the Investor (the “ Preferred Shares ”), and the Company shall issue, sell and deliver to the Investor, such number of Preferred Shares, for a purchase price per Preferred Share equal to $1,000; provided that in no event shall the number of shares of Series A Preferred Stock (on an as-converted basis) be in excess of 19.99% of the outstanding shares of the Company’s stock at the time of Closing (and, for the avoidance of doubt, to the extent that the number of shares of Series A Preferred Stock (on an as-converted basis) exceeds 19.99% of the outstanding shares of the Company’s Common Stock at the time of Closing, such number of shares of Series A Preferred Stock shall be reduced to that number of whole shares that constitutes less than 19.99% of the outstanding shares of the Company’s Common Stock at the time of Closing and any such reduction shall result in a commensurate increase in the number of shares of Series B Preferred Stock to be issued at the Closing). The aggregate purchase price of the Preferred Shares shall be up to $150,000,000 (the “ Purchase Price ”). The purchase of the Preferred Shares pursuant to this Section 2.01 is referred to as the “ Purchase ”.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: This Agreement and the Plan contain the entire understanding and agreement between the Company and the Grantee concerning the Restricted Stock and the shares of the Company’s Common Stock that may be issued pursuant to this Agreement, and supersede any prior or contemporaneous negotiations and understandings. The Company and the Grantee have made no promises, agreements, conditions or understandings relating to the Restricted Stock or the shares of the Company’s Common Stock that may be issued pursuant to this Agreement, either orally or in writing, that are not included in this Agreement or the Plan.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: based on “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin,” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2, the Fourteenth Amendment contains no such limiting language. See iscrimination based on homosexuality is subject only to rational basis review. See Richenberg v. Perry, 97 F.3d 256, 260-61 (8th Cir.1996) (stating that under rational basis review, a claimant has the burden to demonstrate that the challenged government conduct is “not rationally related to any legitimate government purpose”). Nevertheless, a claimant’s failure to prove membership in a suspect class does not automatically deprive him of any cognizable constitutional claim as defendant suggests, but instead merely lowers the standard under which the conduct at issue must be scrutinized. See City of Cleburne, 473 U.S. at 446, 105 S.Ct. 3249 (<HOLDING>). In Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620, 116 S.Ct. Options: A. holding that convicted sex offenders are not a suspect class B. holding group published doctrine does not apply to oral remarks of other individuals C. recognizing that strict scrutiny applies to facial discrimination against a suspect class D. holding that a courts refusal to recognize a group of individuals as a suspect class does not leave them entirely unprotected from invidious discrimination E. holding that kentucky does not recognize any inherent right to local government

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that a courts refusal to recognize a group of individuals as a suspect class does not leave them entirely unprotected from invidious discrimination
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 HERETO (1) WAIVES ITS RIGHT TO TRIAL UNDER ANY ISSUE BY JURY WITH RESPECT TO ANY DISPUTE BROUGHT UNDER THIS AGREEMENT, (2) WITH THE EXCEPTION OF RELIEF MANDATED BY STATUTE, ANY CLAIM TO PUNITIVE, EXEMPLARY, MULTIPLIED, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL OR LOST PROFITS/REVENUES DAMAGES, AND (3) ANY CLAIM FOR ATTORNEY FEES, COSTS AND PREJUDGMENT INTEREST.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: we are providing our services on an `` as is '' basis without any express or implied warranties , including , but not limited to , and we exprsssly disclaim , any warranties of merchantability , fitness for a particular purpose , title , non-infringement , and freedom from computer virus or other harmful code .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Debtor will upon demand pay to the Secured Party the amount of any and all reasonable expenses, including the reasonable fees and disbursements of its counsel and of any experts and agents, which the Secured Party may incur in connection with: (a) the custody, preservation, use or operation of, or the sale of, collection from, or other realization upon, any of the Collateral; (b) the exercise or enforcement of any of the rights of the Secured Party hereunder; or (c) the failure by the Debtor to perform or observe any of the provisions hereof.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to the terms and conditions and within the limitations of the Plan, the Board may modify an Option, or, once an Option is exercisable, accelerate the rate at which it may be exercised, and may extend or renew outstanding Options granted under the Plan or accept the surrender of outstanding Options (to the extent not theretofore exercised) and authorize the granting of new Options in substitution for such Options, provided such action is permissible under Section 422 of the Code and the Nevada Securities Rules. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 5(k), however, no modification of an Option shall, without the consent of the Optionee, alter to the Optionee’s detriment or impair any rights or obligations under any Option theretofore granted under the Plan.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as provided herein, neither this Agreement nor any of the rights, interests or obligations hereunder shall be assigned by any of the parties without the prior written consent of the other parties hereto, except that Parent may assign, it its sole discretion, any or all of its rights, interest and obligations hereunder to any direct or indirect wholly owned Subsidiary of Parent. Subject to the preceding sentence, this Agreement will be binding upon, inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, this Agreement (including the documents and instruments referred to herein) is not intended to confer upon any Person other than the parties hereto any rights or remedies hereunder; provided, however, that the Company is an intended third party beneficiary of the agreement of the Stockholder set forth in Section 3(a) hereof.

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: whose names had been randomly drawn from the wheel. Counsel further indicated his client, Vallorie Clark, is black. The Court instructed counsel to file whatever he wished and stated, “[a]nd we’ll deal with it before 10 o’clock [tomorrow]. We’ll deal with it.” Following further voir dire and challenges for cause in Rizzoli, sixteen names, including that of one black, were selected from the wheel. In exercising the defendants’ peremptory challenges, the assistant City attorney excluded the black prospective juror from jury service. The plaintiff in Rizzoli is white. The Court then proceeded with jury selection in Simmons, a ease in which the Court had, on June 16, 1986, dismissed the Monell count. See Monell v. Dept. of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 98 S.Ct. 2018, 56 L.Ed.2d 611 (1978) (<HOLDING>). Following further voir dire and challenges Options: A. holding that a municipality may be held liable as a person under 1983 B. holding that a municipality may only be held liable under 1983 for a policy practice or custom C. holding inter alia that a municipality cannot be held liable under section 1983 on a respondeat superior theory D. holding that a municipality may not be held liable under section 1983 under a theory of respondeat superi or but may be liable for policies or customs that violate an employees constitutional rights E. holding that municipality may not be held liable under 1983 upon theory of respondeat superior

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that a municipality may be held liable as a person under 1983
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 Fireman’s Fund, it was never a party to the state court action. Plaintiffs claim that Fireman’s Fund is an agent of Enterprise does not change this simple fact. Thus, Fireman’s Fund is a new party to these proceedings. Plaintiff argues that Enterprise was only dismissed upon its counsel’s representations that it was self-insured and provided $1,000,000 in “available liability limits” for Ms. Wilson. Having reviewed the letter of Enterprise’s counsel to Plaintiffs counsel, the court finds that counsel made no representation in that letter that it would provide coverage for Ms. Wilson. Instead, counsel’s letter merely confirmed that Ms. Wilson selected supplemental liability protection with limits of $1,000,000. Thus, Fire Insurance Exchange v. Bell by Bell, 643 N.E.2d 310 (Ind.1994) (<HOLDING>), is inapposite. The court finds that this Options: A. holding that policy limits are not a defense to coverage and that policy limits define the amount of coverage B. holding that a defendant has a constitutional right to counsel as a matter of right on direct appeal C. holding that the state as well as the defendant has a right to rely on compliance with rule 16 D. holding had a right as a matter of law to rely on material misrepresentations of defense counsel that defendant would pay the policy limits E. recognizing the right to counsel on appeal

assistant: The best answer is D. holding had a right as a matter of law to rely on material misrepresentations of defense counsel that defendant would pay the policy limits
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: Use the proceeds of the Credit Extensions (a) to finance the acquisition of working capital assets of the Borrowers, including Permitted Acquisitions and the purchase of inventory and equipment, in each case in the ordinary course of business, (b) to finance Capital Expenditures of the Borrowers, and (c) for general corporate purposes of the Loan Parties, in each case to the extent permitted under applicable Law and the Loan Documents.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No waiver shall be effective unless it is in writing and signed by an authorized representative of the waiving party, provided however, that the Required Buyers may waive any provision of this Amendment, and any waiver of any provision of this Amendment made in conformity with the provisions of this Section 10.11 shall be binding on all Buyers and holders of Securities, as applicable.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each party hereby waives, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, any right they may have to a trial by jury in respect of any suit, action or proceeding arising out of this Agreement or any transaction contemplated hereby. Each party ( i ) certifies that no representative, agent or attorney of any other party has represented, expressly or otherwise, that such other party would not, in the event of litigation, seek to enforce the foregoing waiver and ( ii ) acknowledges that they and the other party hereto have been induced to enter into the Agreement by, among other things, the mutual waivers and certifications in this Section 6(l).

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Holder shall not issue any press release or otherwise make any public statements with respect to the transactions contemplated herein without the prior written approval of Kalyx and Company (not to be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed). Holder hereby authorizes Kalyx and Company to publish and disclose in any announcement or disclosure required by the SEC, Nasdaq (or, if applicable, the New York Stock Exchange or the NYSE MKT) or the Registration Statement (including all documents and schedules filed with the SEC in connection with the foregoing), Holder’s identity and ownership of the Shares and the nature of Holder’s commitments and agreements under this Agreement, the Merger Agreement and any other Ancillary Documents.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: court further disqualified Camejo because his affidavit indicated that he was not enrolled in a political party, which was not true because of his membership in the Green Party in California. B. The Challenges to the Signatures Having determined that the Candidates were not qualified to be on the ballot due to their Reform Party nomination, the Commonwealth Court then addressed the three procedural objections. First, Candidates argued that certain later registrations should be permitted, contending that persons who sign and mail registration cards during the circulation period may be properly registered, even though they do not appear on the registration list. The court cited as precedent Petition of Joseph J. O’Hara, 795 A.2d 513 (Pa.Cmwlth.2002) (single judge opinion by Simpson, J.) (<HOLDING>) and In re Nomination Petition of Roth, Options: A. holding that individuals have no expectation of privacy in their license registration or insurance documents and citing outofstate cases that have held that individuals do not have a privacy interest in their registration records B. recognizing the extraordinary value of the vehicle title and registration records for law enforcement C. holding that the postmark on the registration application was the determining factor when a registration is subsequently approved D. holding that alaskas registration requirement was a civil remedy and nonpunitive E. holding that a hearing would serve no purpose because the registration act and notification law subject all sex offenders as defined by the registration act to the registration and notification provisions and law enforcement authorities have no discretion to determine which offenders would be exposed to public dissemination

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the postmark on the registration application was the determining factor when a registration is subsequently approved
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: because, if prosecuted for violating Wis. Stat. 941.29, his earlier felony convictions could have been predicates without violating the ex post facto clause); United States v. Matassini, 565 F.2d 1297, 1307 (5th Cir.1978) (interpreting 18 U.S.C. § 1202(a)(1), the predecessor to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)) (determining Congress intended statutes prohibiting felons from possessing firearms to reach “persons convicted of felonies prior to [the effective date of the statute]”); Cases v. United States, 131 F.2d 916, 921 (1st Cir.1942) (finding, if a statute “is a bona fide regulation of conduct which the legislature has power to regulate, it is not bad as an ex post facto law even though the right to engage in the conduct is made to depend on past behavi-our, even behaviour before (9th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>). Cf. United States v. Baca-Valenzuela, 118 Options: A. holding that the ex post facto clause has no application to deportation B. holding no ex post facto violation because enhancement provision was already on the books when the defendant committed the 1985 firearm offense C. holding that the supreme courts ex post facto precedents do not clearly establish that amended section 29336 violates the ex post facto clause D. holding no violation of ex post facto clause because enhancement provision increases the punishment for being a felon in possession of a firearm that traveled in or affected interstate commerce and it does not affect the punishment previously meted out to the defendant for the crimes he committed prior to the effective date of the statute E. holding that parole guidelines are subject to the ex post facto clause

assistant: The best answer is B. holding no ex post facto violation because enhancement provision was already on the books when the defendant committed the 1985 firearm offense
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: Key Employee agrees to abide by all applicable laws and regulations and all Company policies and procedures as they are established. Violation of such laws, regulations, policies, procedures or the NDA may lead to immediate termination of employment. The terms of this Agreement and Key Employee’s employment with the Company shall be governed in all aspects by the laws of the State of Delaware; provided, however, if Key Employee lives and works primarily in the State of California, the laws of the State of California shall govern. This Agreement may be executed in more than one counterpart, and signatures transmitted via facsimile or PDF shall be deemed equivalent to originals.

assistant: Miscellaneous
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: None of the reports, financial statements, certificates or other information (other than forward-looking statements, projections and statements of a general industry nature, as to which no representation or warranty is made) furnished by or on behalf of Guarantor to Guarantor Beneficiary in connection with the negotiation of this Guaranty or any amendment hereto or delivered hereunder or thereunder (as modified or supplemented by other information so furnished) taken together with any information contained in the public filings made by Guarantor with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, contains any material misstatement of fact or omits to state any material fact necessary to make the statements therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not materially misleading.

assistant: Disclosures
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: view that these findings do not permit the inference that she could perform full-time sedentary work takes too narrow a view of the evidence. Killen also argues that Reliance Standard unfairly brought forward its strongest evidence — the independent medical examiner’s report — only in the final stage of her appeal, thereby preventing her from engaging in the “meaningful dialogue” contemplated by § 1133. See Lafleur v. La. Health Serv. & Indem. Co., 563 F.3d 148, 154 (5th Cir.2009). Circuits that have addressed the issue have generally determined that ERISA does not guarantee claimants an opportunity to rebut an independent medical examination report generated during an appeal prior to a denial of benefits. See Metzger v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., 476 F.3d 1161, 1167 (10th Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>); see also Pettaway v. Teachers Ins. & Annuity Options: A. holding that erisa does not preempt the plaintiffs claim that the erisa plan administrator is liable for medical malpractice where the plaintiff premised the claim solely on state law and did not invoke the erisa plan B. holding that district courts order remanding an erisa benefits determination to a plan administrator was nonfinal and therefore not appealable after the remand to plan administrator plan participant still could appeal the district courts decision that erisa preempted her state law claim and if successful she would be able to pursue punitive damage C. holding that the plan administrator did not abuse her discretion by denying benefits when faced with conflicting medical reports D. holding that plan administrator of an erisa health plan did not have to anticipate the confusion of a plan participant E. holding that erisa and its implementing regulations do not require a plan administrator to provide a claimant with access to the medical opinion reports of appeallevel reviewers prior to a final decision on appeal

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that erisa and its implementing regulations do not require a plan administrator to provide a claimant with access to the medical opinion reports of appeallevel reviewers prior to a final decision on appeal
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: ( b ) you acknowledge and agree that certain materials on or in the products are the property of third party licensors and , without prejudice to any and all other rights and remedies available , each such licensor has the right to directly enforce relevant provisions of section 12 against you .

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company shall keep or cause to be kept at the principal office of the Company appropriate books and records with respect to the Company’s business. The books of the Company shall be maintained, for financial reporting purposes, on an accrual basis in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“ GAAP ”). All decisions as to accounting matters, except as specifically provided to the contrary herein, shall be made by the Board.

assistant: Records
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: Cash Collateral (or the appropriate portion thereof) provided to reduce Fronting Exposure or to secure other obligations shall be released promptly following (i) the elimination of the applicable Fronting Exposure or other obligations giving rise thereto (including by the termination of Defaulting Lender status of the applicable Lender (or, as appropriate, its assignee following compliance with Section 10.06(b)(vi) )) or (ii) the determination by the Agent and the applicable Issuing Banks that there exists excess Cash Collateral; provided , however , the Person providing Cash Collateral and the applicable Issuing Bank may agree that Cash Collateral shall not be released but instead held to support future anticipated Fronting Exposure or other obligations.

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: petition that the first publication of notice of the granting of letters testamentary was on May 12, 1994, and that their will contest was not filed until March 6, 1995. As such, they admitted that more than six months had elapsed since the first publication of notice of the granting of letters such that their will contest action was barred by the running of the statute of limitations found in § 473.083. Thus, there was no factual issue for the jury req f the exception or avoidance, subjecting the party relying on the exception to the statutory bar of § 473.083. Angoff, 917 S.W.2d at 211. In this case, because there is no dispute that the appellants pled the Bos-worth exception to the affirmative defens W.2d 584, 590 (Mo.App.1983); Hays v. Proctor, 404 S.W.2d 756, 762 (Mo.App.1966) (<HOLDING>). The respondents, in their answer to the Options: A. recognizing that upon request the trial court may provide a limiting instruction to the jury B. holding that defensive theory must be submitted to jury when theory is raised by evidence from any source C. holding that a trial judge is obliged to give a correct jury instruction notwithstanding that request for instruction was technically erroneous if the evidence generates the subject matter of the jury instruction D. holding that plaintiffs request that inquiry be made of the jury about its intent behind the verdict was not a request to poll the jury E. holding that it is a partys duty to request a jury instruction submitting its defensive theory to the jury

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that it is a partys duty to request a jury instruction submitting its defensive theory to the jury
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: coverage. Ulrich, 839 P.2d at 948 (following Worthington v. State (Wyo. 1979), 598 P.2d 796, 807 (construing the phrase “arising out of the use” in the context of liability coverage)). The Worthington court described the natural consequences test as follows: In determining whether an injury arose out of use, the evidence must demonstrate that it was the natural and reasonable incident or consequence of the use of an insured vehicle, the causal connec tion being reasonably apparent. If the injury was directly caused by some independent or intervening cause wholly disassociated from, independent of, or remote from the use of the automobile, the injury cannot be held to arise out of its use. The resolution of the question necessarily depends to a g (Mo. App. Ct. 1994), 878 S.W.2d 853, 857 (<HOLDING>); Doe v. State Farm Mut. Fire & Cas. Co. (E.D. Options: A. holding that there must be a causal connection between the advertising activity and the injury alleged in the underlying complaint B. holding that to have standing a plaintiff must establish an injury in fact a casual connection between the injury and that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision C. holding that for requisite causal connection to exist the vehicle must be the instrumentality which caused the injury not merely a contribution which causes a condition which in turn causes the injury D. recognizing that discrimination causes injury to the whole community E. holding that to show a causal connection the plaintiff must demonstrate a relationship between the misconduct and the plaintiffs injury

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that for requisite causal connection to exist the vehicle must be the instrumentality which caused the injury not merely a contribution which causes a condition which in turn causes the injury