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: tended to prove that Dingle was credible in that it explained the inconsistencies in her statements. See Lawhorne v. State, 500 So.2d 519, 520 (Fla.1986) (“The credibility of witnesses is always in issue.” (citing Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence § 401.1 (1984 ed.))). The probative value of the testimony was not outweighed by its prejudicial effect. This is especially so when compared to the cases approving such testimony in the context of gang activity, where, like the witness, the defendant is a member of the gang. Moreover, in the above cases, there is usually something more — such as an express code of silence and a legitimate fear of retaliation — than the general reluctance to speak truthfully here. In those circumstances, the testimony, unlike the testimony here, 4) (<HOLDING>). The instant case involves the admission of Options: A. holding that prosecutors reference to cooperation agreements with government witnesses was not plain error B. holding prosecutors reference to defendant being only witness in courtroom during testimony as tailoring opportunity not plain error C. holding under plain error review that prosecutions repeated references to defendants silence in a one day trial were not harmless despite defendants responsive comments on silence D. holding that prosecutors reference to code of silence among witnesses to shooting not plain error where argument finds support in record E. holding that prosecutors reference to the fact that not one white witness has produced contradictory evidence was plain error

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that prosecutors reference to code of silence among witnesses to shooting not plain error where argument finds support in 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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: members who were below this new minimum age when they started using the services under a previous user agreement may continue to use them , as they have already reached the new minimum age since then or will reach it in the near future .

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: Profit Sharing Contributions made pursuant to subsections (a) and (b) of this Section 4.1 shall be allocated in the manner as set forth in Section 7.4(a). Any Profit Sharing Contribution made pursuant to this Section 4.1 shall be made wholly in cash, wholly in shares of Company Stock, or in a combination thereof, as determined by the Company. A Profit Sharing Contribution made pursuant to this Section 4.1 for any Plan Year shall be delivered by the Employer making the contribution to the Trustee prior to the due date, including any extensions thereof, of the Employer’s federal income tax return for the fiscal year of the Employer which ends with or within such Plan Year. If any such Profit Sharing Contribution is made by the delivery to the Trustee of shares of Company Stock, then such stock shall be valued either (i) at the closing price of the stock as reported in The Wall Street Journal on the New York Stock Exchange Composite Transactions List (or the consolidated tape of such other principal exchange on which such stock is traded) as of the date such shares are delivered to the Trustee or purchased by the Trustee or, if such date is not a trading day, such price on the most recent trading day prior thereto or (ii) by the average trading price of the stock, as determined by the Committee in its sole discretion, on such date. Notwithstanding the foregoing, effective December 15, 2015, in no event shall Profit Sharing Contributions be made either wholly or otherwise in shares of Company Stock.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: if you opt out of the agreement to arbitrate , if your dispute is an excluded dispute , or if the arbitration agreement is found to be unenforceable , you agree to be subject to the `` forum and venue '' provision in the `` dispute resolution '' section set forth above .

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: security if [it] is a security issued by an investment company that is registered, or that has filed a registration statement, under the Investment.Company Act of 1940.” 15 U.S.C. § 77r(b)(2). The Second Circuit recently stated that a variable insurance product is a “covered security” under SLUSA when: (1) it is a “security”; and (2) the separate accounts used for marketing the product are registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940. See Lander, 251 F.3d at 109. First, the plaintiffs variable universal life insurance policy is a “security” because it invests in mutual funds which are regulated by the SEC. See SEC v. Variable Annuity Life Ins. Co. of America, 359 U.S. 65, 70-72, 79 S.Ct. 618, 621-22, 3 L.Ed.2d 640 (1959) (<HOLDING>); Lander, 251 F.3d at 109 (same). See also Options: A. holding a summary calendar does not violate due process as long as defendant is able to properly present issues on appeal B. holding that claims not properly raised on direct appeal will not be considered as a basis for collateral relief C. holding that a variable annuity is properly classified as a security D. holding that seventh application for postconviction relief which was rejected because evidence on which it was based was not properly authenticated was properly filed E. holding that a constitutional challenge to a statute is not properly preserved for appellate review if as here it is not presented to the trial court and is raised for the first time on appeal

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that a variable annuity is properly classified as a security
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: United States, 554 F.3d 1029, 1037 (Fed.Cir.2 cting officer did not consider nor discuss STOPSO’s purported mistakes is not disposi-tive. The court cannot assume that the contracting officer did. not consider STOPSO’s compliance with the LOS Requirement, based on the absence of an explicit reference in the Administrative Record of that fact. Plaintiffs request that the court establish a rule whereby agencies affirmatively must document compliance with each and .every proposal requirement is not the law. See John C. Grimberg Co., 702 F.2d at 1372 (“[The United States Court of Federal Claims’] equitable powers should be exercised in a way which best limits judicial interference in contract procurement and administration.”); see also Ala. Aircraft Indus. Inc-Birmingham, 586 F.3d at 1375 (<HOLDING>) (internal quotation marks and citations Options: A. recognizing that courts accord significant deference to an agency decision where agency expertise is involved B. holding an agency decision is not final during the time the agency considers a petition for review C. holding that an agency acts arbitrarily and capriciously if it entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem D. holding that an agency acts arbitrarily and capriciously if it entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem or offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency E. holding that the court must find that the agency entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency or the decision is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the court must find that the agency entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency or the decision is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise
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: Amend Notice of Removal Within the thirty-day period prescribed by § 1446(b), a defendant may freely amend its notice of removal. Blakeley v. United Cable System, 105 F.Supp.2d. 574, 578 (S.D.Miss.2000). And the majority of courts—including the Fifth Circuit—recognize that even after expiration of this thirty-day period, a defendant may still amend its removal petition in order to cure defective allegations of jurisdiction. See Howery v. Allstate Ins. Co., 243 F.3d 912, 920 n. 9 (5th Cir.2001); (“[Pjrior to judgment, a party may amend its pleadings to allege omitted jurisdictional facts”); Whitmire v. Victus, Ltd., 212 F.3d 885, 888 (5th Cir.2000) (emphasizing that § 1653 should be broadly construed); D.J. McDuffie, Inc. v. Old Reliable Fire Ins. Co., 608 F.2d 145, 146 (5th Cir.1979) (<HOLDING>). The authorization for such amendments derives Options: A. holding that the failure to join all the defendants in a removal petition is not a jurisdictional defect B. holding that any defect in removal procedure must be cured within the 30day removal period or it is fatal to the removal and defendants failure to attach exhibits to the notice of removal within that time required remand C. holding that removal was proper where the petitioning defendant stated that all parties agreed in its notice of removal and the petition was followed by the supplemental consent signed by each of the parties but filed outside the 30 day period D. holding that plaintiffs failure to allege citizenship of first defendant did not constitute good cause for second defendants failure to timely join in removal petition E. holding that amendment of removal petition was properly allowed to correct jurisdictional allegations in removal petition which were defective or faulty due to defendants failure to specifically allege the citizenship of the parties at the time the suit was brought and at the time the removal petition was filed missing allegation was not a fatal omission which could not be cured by amendment

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that amendment of removal petition was properly allowed to correct jurisdictional allegations in removal petition which were defective or faulty due to defendants failure to specifically allege the citizenship of the parties at the time the suit was brought and at the time the removal petition was filed missing allegation was not a fatal omission which could not be cured by amendment
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: 40-41 (1st Cir.1999). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review in No. 04-1134. Additionally, we uphold the immigration judge’s finding that the state court’s grant of probation before judgment constituted a “conviction” within the meaning of the federal immigration laws. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(48)(A) (2000); Yanez-Popp v. INS, 998 F.2d 231, 234-37 (4th Cir.1993). Finally, to the extent that Ameh claims that the Board’s use of the summary affirmance procedure as set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(e)(4) (2004) violated his rights under the Due Process Clause, we find that this claim is squarely foreclosed by our recent decision in Blanco de Belbruno v. Ashcroft, 362 F.3d 272 (4th Cir.2004). We do not separately review whether the Board appropriately streamlined this case. See id. at 281 (<HOLDING>). We therefore deny the petition for review in Options: A. holding that the critical date for a waiver of inadmissibility under section 237a1h is the date of the immigration judges decision B. holding that a board affirmance of an ro decision subsumes that decision C. holding that a reviewing court is not to substitute its decision for that of the board D. holding that the remedy when the board improperly affirms a case under its summary affirmance procedures for example by allowing a nonharmless error to slip through is judicial review of the immigration judges decision E. holding that where a statute provides a procedure for judicial review of a bid protest a party may not circumvent the established procedures and was obligated either to pursue its right to judicial review or to file its declaratory judgment action in compliance with the procedures for administrative appeal set out in the statute

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the remedy when the board improperly affirms a case under its summary affirmance procedures for example by allowing a nonharmless error to slip through is judicial review of the immigration judges decision
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Any Loan Document may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original, but all of which when taken together shall constitute a single contract. This Agreement shall become effective when Agent has received counterparts bearing the signatures of all parties hereto. Delivery of a signature page of any Loan Document by telecopy or other electronic means shall be effective as delivery of a manually executed counterpart of such agreement. Any signature, contract formation or record-keeping through electronic means, which shall have the same legal validity and enforceability as manual or paper-based methods, to the fullest extent permitted by Applicable Law, including the Federal Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act, the New York State Electronic Signatures and Records Act, or any similar state law based on the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act.

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: To the extent invoiced reasonably in advance of the First Amendment Closing Date, the Borrower shall pay to the Administrative Agent all reasonable out of pocket expenses incurred in connection with the execution of this First Amendment and any amounts outstanding pursuant to Section 9.03 of the Revolving Credit Agreement, including the reasonable fees, charges and disbursements of Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP, counsel for the Administrative Agent.

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: Seller is not a “foreign person” within the meaning of Sections 1445(f)(3) and 7701(a)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “ Code ”), and is not subject to any federal, state or local withholding obligation of Buyer under the tax laws applicable to Seller or the Property. Seller will provide Buyer an Affidavit of Exemption pursuant to Section 1445(b)(c) of the Code, or provide Escrow Holder an Affidavit of non-foreign status under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. Seller is not subject to withholding tax under California Revenue and Taxation Section 18662, but is exempt under Section 18662(e)(1).

assistant: Withholdings
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: confidence. See id. (“A debtor-creditor relationship is not by itself a fiduciary relationship although the addition of a relationship of confidence, trust, or superior knowledge or control may indicate that such a relationship exists.” (internal quotations omitted)); Mfrs. Hanover Trust Co. v. Yanakas, 7 F.3d 310, 318 (2d Cir.1993) (noting that although no fiduciary duties arise in the ordinary debt- or/creditor relationship, they may arise under the proper circumstances) (quoting Fisher v. Bishop, 108 N.Y. 25, 28, 15 N.E. 331 (1888)); Murphy, 90 N.Y.2d at 270-72, 660 N.Y.S.2d 371 (noting that fiduciary duties may arise in the insurance context if the requisite trust and confidence is established); Batas v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 281 A.D.2d 260, 724 N.Y.S.2d 3, 7 (1st Dep’t 2001) (<HOLDING>). In this case, the complaint alleges that the Options: A. recognizing fiduciary exception in the erisa context B. recognizing similar duties C. recognizing that fiduciary duties may arise in the insurance context where circumstances are appropriate D. holding that a special relationship may arise from the factual circumstances of a particular case E. holding that a breach of duties that a fiduciary contractually assumes beyond those duties imposed by law is considered to arise out of contract

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that fiduciary duties may arise in the insurance context where circumstances are appropriate
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: Alternatively, she asserts that Jones established a confidential relationship with Fair-cloth “by her attitude and representations.” Faircloth obtained findings that Transport did not act in good faith and that the defendants breached a fiduciary duty owed her. Both theories depend on whether a special relationship arose between Transport and Faircloth. This Court has held that an insurer owes an insured a duty of good faith and fair dealing because of the special relationship arising out of the insurance contract. Aranda v. Insurance Co. of N. Am., 748 S.W.2d 210, 212 (Tex.1988). However, the Court has not squarely ruled on whether an insurer’s duty of good faith and fair dealing extends to a third-party claimant. See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Watson, 876 S.W.2d 145, 150 (Tex.1994) (<HOLDING>). Identifying a source of such a duty is Options: A. holding that duty of good faith and fair dealing did not extend to thirdparty claimant B. recognizing workers compensation insurance carrier owes employee duty of good faith and fair dealing in processing compensation claims C. holding that an insurer has a duty to act with the utmost good faith towards its insured D. holding that an insurer owes no duty of good faith to thirdparty claimants under the insurance code without reaching the question of a possible commonlaw duty E. holding that the duty of good faith and fair dealing is a contractual duty

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that an insurer owes no duty of good faith to thirdparty claimants under the insurance code without reaching the question of a possible commonlaw duty
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: Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Indus., Inc., 508 U.S. 49, 113 S.Ct. 1920, 123 L.Ed.2d 611 (1993)). See also Dixon v. International Broth. of Police Officers, 504 F.3d 73, 86 (1st Cir.2007). Defendants argue, correctly in the court’s view, that there is no reason these same principles would not also apply in the present context, where plaintiff seeks to hold defendants liable for exercising their First Amendment right to initiate litigation. See Sosa v. DIRECTV, Inc., 437 F.3d 923, 931 (9th Cir.2006) (“[W]e conclude that the Noerr-Pennington doctrine stands for a generic rule of statutory construction, applicable to any statutory interpretation that could implicate the rights protected by the Petition Clause”) (citing White v. Lee, 227 F.3d 1214, 1231 (9th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>)); Zemenco, Inc. v. Developers Diversified Options: A. holding that state official english law violated the first amendment and the fourteenth amendments guarantee of equal protection under a strict scrutiny analysis because it impinges upon both the fundamental right to participate equally in the political process and the right to petition the government for redress B. holding that noerrpennington doctrine exempts from antitrust liability any legitimate use of the political process by private individuals even if their intent is to eliminate competition C. holding before be k that because it is based on and implements the first amendment right to petition the noerrpennington doctrine is not limited to the antitrust context but applies equally in all contexts D. holding that an individual is immune from antitrust liability for exercising first amendment right to petition the government E. holding that there must be a causal connection between the alleged antitrust violation and the antitrust injury for there to be antitrust standing

assistant: The best answer is C. holding before be k that because it is based on and implements the first amendment right to petition the noerrpennington doctrine is not limited to the antitrust context but applies equally in all contexts
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 failure by either Party hereto at any time to give notice of any breach by the other Party of, or to require compliance with, any condition or provision of this Agreement shall be deemed a waiver of similar or dissimilar provisions or conditions at the same or at any prior or subsequent time.

assistant: No 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: A Guarantor shall automatically be released from its obligations hereunder (other than with respect to amounts then due and payable by such Guarantor) upon the consummation of any transaction permitted by the Master Lease, the result of which is that such Guarantor ceases to be a Subsidiary of the Tenant; provided that the Landlord shall have consented to such transaction to the extent such consent is required by the terms of the Master Lease; and provided further that a Change in Control (and any transaction related thereto) shall not be deemed to be permitted by the Master Lease without Landlord consent except to the extent any actual or deemed assignment under the Master Lease relating to such Change in Control is permitted under the Master Lease; and provided further that no release of such Guarantor shall be permitted or occur in a Foreclosure COC or a Foreclosure Assignment.

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: role [as an accomplice as opposed to the shooter] in the crime in the penalty phase.” 602 Pa. at 292, 980 A.2d at 75. In addressing the materiality requirement of Brady, we explained: Materiality extends to evidence affecting the credibility of witnesses, rather than merely to purely exculpatory evidence. See Giglio v. United States, [405 U.S. 150, 92 S.Ct. 763, 31 L.Ed.2d 104 (1972) ] (“When the ‘reliability of a given witness may well be determinative of guilt or innocence,’ nondisclosure of evidence affecting credibility falls within this general rule.”). Moreover, we have held that the protection of Brady extends to the defendant’s ability to investigate alternate defense theories and to formulate trial strategy. See Commonwealth v. Green, 536 Pa. 599, 640 A.2d 1242, 1245 (1994) (<HOLDING>). “[F]avorable evidence is material, and Options: A. holding that the trial court did not err in its refusal to consider the borrowers defense of merger on appeal since the defense was outside the subject matter jurisdiction of the trial court B. holding that courts must consider any adverse effect that the prosecutors failure to disclose might have had on not only the presentation of the defense at trial but the preparation of the defense as well C. holding that the failure to disclose evidence known to the defense cannot form the basis of a brady violation D. holding that defendants failure to assert the defense in any pretrial motions did not waive defendants limitations defense because the assertion of a limitations defense in the answer preserved defendants right to raise the defense both during the first trial and before the second E. holding that the trial court did not err in refusing to consider debtors claim of rescission as an equitable defense to the foreclosure action where that defense was not raised before the clerk

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that courts must consider any adverse effect that the prosecutors failure to disclose might have had on not only the presentation of the defense at trial but the preparation of the defense as well
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 authorizations, approvals, or permits, if any, of any governmental authority or regulatory body of the United States or of any state that are required in connection with the lawful sale and issuance of the Notes and Warrants shall have been duly obtained and shall be effective on and as of such Closing.

assistant: Qualifications
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: its discretion in dismissing [the post-conviction count for intoxication manslaughter] as a double jeopardy violation.” “Habeas corpus is by definition an extraordinary writ in which the restraint of one’s liberty is challenged as illegal.” Saucedo v. State, 795 S.W.2d 8, 9 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1990, no pet.). When “the premise of a habeas corpus application is destroyed by subsequent developments, the legal, issues raised thereunder aré rendered moot.” State v. Golding, 398 S.W.3d 745, 747 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, pet. ref'd) (quoting Saucedo, 795 S.W.2d at 9 and citing Ex parte Branch, 553 S.W.2d 380, 381 (Tex.Crim.App.1977)); see Ex parte Norvell, 528 S.W.2d 129, 131 (Tex.Crim.App.1975); Ex parte Horton, 305 S.W.3d 200, 201 (Tex.App.—Waco 2009, pet. ref'd) (<HOLDING>). We cannot give any opinion on the merits Options: A. holding that because defendants community supervision was revoked habeas challenge of community supervision was moot B. holding that challenge to oneyear order for protection was not moot even though it had expired C. holding that the challenge to a university regulation was moot because the regulation had been substantially amended D. holding that a challenge to the disbursement of attorneys fees was not equitably moot E. holding that universitys amendment of regulation made moot a challenge to regulations

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that because defendants community supervision was revoked habeas challenge of community supervision was moot
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 sentence") cert. denied, -- U.S. --, 130 S.Ct. 190, 175 L.Ed.2d 118 (2009); Jones v. Page, 76 F.3d 831, 846 (7th Cir.1996) (finding that counsel's failure to introduce evidence of petitioner's drug abuse was reasonable strategic choice because such evidence was "double-edged sword"). 5. Jury Notes 4 38 Smith claims his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when the trial court judge replied to two jury notes without counsel being present. Smith acknowledges that this claim was raised and decided in his direct appeal. He requests, however, that we reconsider our disposition of this claim in the interest of justice. We find no miscarriage of justice in our previous disposition of this issue. This claim is denied. See Clayton v. State, 1995 OK CR 3, 13, 892 P.2d 646, 650 (<HOLDING>). 6. Cumulative Error {389 Smith requests that Options: A. holding that any claim that was raised or could have been raised on direct appeal is barred from review on post conviction under the doctrine of res judicata B. holding that issues that were raised and decided on direct appeal are barred by res judicata from further consideration on petition for postconviction relief C. holding that claims raised on direct appeal are procedurally barred from consideration in a rule 3850 motion D. holding that a habeas claim is procedurally barred where it was already raised on direct appeal and decided on the merits by this court E. holding that postconviction relief claims which either were raised or could have been raised on direct appeal were properly denied without an evidentiary hearing

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that issues that were raised and decided on direct appeal are barred by res judicata from further consideration on petition for postconviction relief
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: (i) All foreign, Federal, provincial, and material state and local tax returns and other reports required by applicable Requirements of Law to be filed by any Loan Party have been filed, or extensions have been obtained, and (ii) all Taxes imposed upon any Loan Party or any property of any Loan Party in an aggregate amount for all such Taxes exceeding $2,000,000 that have become due and payable on or prior to the date hereof have been paid, except to the extent contested in good faith by proper proceedings which stay the imposition of any penalty, fine or Lien resulting from the non-payment thereof and with respect to which adequate reserves have been set aside for the payment thereof on the Financial Statements in accordance with GAAP.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: combine can be important because “inventions in most, if not all, instances rely upon building blocks since uncovered, and claimed discoveries almost of necessity will be combinations of what, in some sense, is already known.” KSR, 550 U.S. at 418-19, 127 S.Ct. 1727. “[A]ny need known in the field of endeavor at the time of the invention and addressed by the patent can provide a reason for combining the elements in the manner claimed.” Id. at 420, 127 S.Ct. 1727. Additionally, a patent’s subject matter can be proved obvious “by noting that there existed at the time of invention a known problem for which there was an obvious solution encompassed by the patent’s claims.” Id. at 419-20, 127 S.Ct. 1727; see also Perfect Web Techs., Inc. v. InfoUSA Inc., 587 F.3d 1324, 1329 (Fed.Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>). “When there is a design need or market Options: A. holding that obviousness analysis may include recourse to logic judgment and common sense available to a person of ordinary skill that do not necessarily require explication in any reference or expert opinion B. holding that obviousness is determined entirely with reference to a hypothetical person having ordinary skill in the art and the actual inventors skill is irrelevant to the obviousness inquiry C. holding that factual underpinnings of obviousness include whether reference provides motivation to combine its teachings with those of another reference D. holding that jurors do not need expert testimony on matters of common knowledge E. holding that summary judgment on grounds of obviousness did not require a supporting experts opinion

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that obviousness analysis may include recourse to logic judgment and common sense available to a person of ordinary skill that do not necessarily require explication in any reference or expert opinion
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Subject to Section 6.01 , Recipient, on behalf of itself and its Affiliates, Representatives or other Persons using such Services, hereby releases each member of the Provider Group and its Representatives (each, a “ Provider Indemnified Party ”), and Recipient hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless each such Provider Indemnified Party from and against any and all Losses arising from, relating to or in connection with the use of any Services by Recipient or any of its Affiliates, Representatives or other Persons using such Services, except to the extent such Losses arise out of, relate to or are a consequence of Provider’s recklessness or willful misconduct.

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: Bill No. 12 does not, in practice, conflict with the Bankruptcy Code's treatment of creditors. 162 . In re Gifford, Case No. 11-40589, Doc. 44 at 33. 163 . The following cases have upheld Supremacy Clause challenges of bankruptcy only exemption statutes: In re Regevig, 389 B.R. 736, 740 (Bankr.N.D.Ariz.2008) (finding Supremacy Clause violation based on controlling 9th Circuit precedent, Kanter); In re Cross, 255 B.R. 25, 34 (Bankr.N.D.Ind.2000) (concluding bankruptcy only exemption is preempted because it "changes the distribution of assets between debtors and creditors and, thus, frustrates the full effectiveness of federal law by changing the balance between debtors and creditors that Congress created in the Bankruptcy Code”); In re Reynolds, 24 B.R. 344, 347 (Bankr.S.D.Ohio 1982) (<HOLDING>). The following cases have rejected Supremacy Options: A. holding that 522 permits states only to adopt uniform exemptions B. holding that because a police department regulation prohibiting beards allowed for medical exemptions but not religious exemptions it was not generally applicable under smith C. holding states may make nondiscriminatory religious practice exemptions but that such exemptions are not constitutionally required D. holding that congress specifically allowed states to use their own exemptions instead of the federal exemptions listed in 522d and new yorks bankruptcy only exemption scheme is not so inconsistent with the exemptions listed in 522d as to render it invalid under the supremacy clause E. holding that dol regulations related to flsa exemptions are enforceable

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that 522 permits states only to adopt uniform exemptions
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 HEREBY KNOWINGLY, VOLUNTARILY AND INTENTIONALLY WAIVE, TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, ANY RIGHT THAT EITHER PARTY OR THEIR HEIRS, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES, SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN RESPECT OF ANY LITIGATION BASED HEREON, OR ARISING OUT OF, UNDER OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER DOCUMENTS EXECUTED IN CONNECTION HEREWITH, OR IN RESPECT OF ANY COURSE OF CONDUCT, STATEMENTS (WHETHER ORAL OR WRITTEN), OR ACTIONS OF ANY PARTY. THIS PROVISION IS A MATERIAL INDUCEMENT FOR EACH OF THE PARTIES TO ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: ground that it had inadvertently failed to apprise defendant or his attorney of its intent to impose an additional term of probation.”). 2. Information Considered Regarding Appropriate Sentence a. Breadth In assessing the. proper sentence, it has. “long [been] recognized that sentencing judges ‘exercise a wide discretion’ .in the types of evidence they may consider ... in determining the kind and extent of punishment to be imposed.” Pepper v.. United States, 562 U.S. 476, 480, 131 S.Ct. 1229, 179 L.Ed.2d 196 (2011). “ ‘Highly relevant ... to [the] selection of an appropriate sentence is the possession of the fullest information possible concerning the defendant’s life and characteristics.’” Id. (quoting Williams v. New York, 337 U.S. 241, 246-47, 69 S.Ct. 1079, 93 L.Ed. 1337 (1949)) (<HOLDING>). A “sentencing judge [is] to consider every Options: A. holding that the district court may consider evidence of a defendants postsentence rehabilitation and that such evidence may support a downward variance from the federal sentencing guidelines B. holding that when a defendants sentence has been set aside on appeal a trial court at resentencing may consider evidence of the defendants postsentencing rehabilitation C. holding that resentencing should consider all sentencing arguments and remanding for court to consider defendants argument for downward departure based on postconviction rehabilitation D. holding that the district court had the discretion to grant a downward departure for postsentence rehabilitation E. recognizing that aberrant criminal behavior may justify downward variance

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the district court may consider evidence of a defendants postsentence rehabilitation and that such evidence may support a downward variance from the federal sentencing guidelines
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 Loan Parties shall not, nor suffer or permit any of their Restricted Subsidiaries to, enter into any transaction with any Affiliate of the Loan Parties that are not Loan Parties, except upon fair and reasonable terms no less favorable to any Loan Party than such Loan Party could obtain in a comparable arm’s-length transaction with a Person not an Affiliate of such Loan Party, except for (a) transactions pursuant to the Provider Acquisition Documents and the Major Acquisition Documents, and (b) compensation and employee benefit arrangements paid to, and awards granted thereunder, and indemnities provided for the benefit of, directors, officers, consultants and employees of the Loan Parties in the ordinary course of business.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Use the proceeds of any Credit Extension, whether directly or indirectly, and whether immediately, incidentally or ultimately , to purchase or carry margin stock (within the meaning of Regulation U of the FRB) or to extend credit to others for the purpose of purchasing or carrying margin stock or to refund Indebtedness indebtedness originally incurred for such purpose.

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 failure or delay on the part of any party to any Loan Document in exercising any right or remedy under, or pursuant to, any Loan Document shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any single or partial exercise of any such right, remedy or power preclude other or further exercise thereof, or the exercise of any other right, remedy or power. The remedies in the Loan Documents are cumulative and are not exclusive of any remedies provided by law.

assistant: No 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: By the issuance of a Letter of Credit (or an amendment to a Letter of Credit increasing the amount thereof) and without any further action on the part of the Issuing Bank or the Revolving Lenders, the Issuing Bank hereby grants to each Applicable Revolving Lender, and each Applicable Revolving Lender hereby acquires from the Issuing Bank, a participation in such Letter of Credit equal to such Lender’s Applicable Percentage of the aggregate amount available to be drawn under such Letter of Credit. In consideration and in furtherance of the foregoing, each Applicable Revolving Lender hereby absolutely and unconditionally agrees to pay in the currency of the LC Disbursement to the Administrative Agent, for the account of the Issuing Bank, such Lender’s Applicable Percentage of each LC Disbursement made by the Issuing Bank and not reimbursed by the Applicable Borrowers on the date due as provided in paragraph (e) of this Section, or of any reimbursement payment required to be refunded to the Applicable Borrowers for any reason. Each Revolving Lender acknowledges and agrees that its obligation to acquire participations pursuant to this paragraph in respect of Letters of Credit is absolute and unconditional and shall not be affected by any circumstance whatsoever, including any amendment, renewal or extension of any Letter of Credit or the occurrence and continuance of a Default or reduction or termination of the Commitments, and that each such payment shall be made without any offset, abatement, withholding or reduction whatsoever.

assistant: Participations
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: Neither the Borrower nor any of its Subsidiaries is in violation of any Requirements of Law of any Governmental Authority, if the effect of such violation could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect and, to the best of the Borrower’s knowledge, no such violation has been alleged and each of the Borrower and its Subsidiaries (i) has filed in a timely manner all reports, documents and other materials required to be filed by it with any Governmental Authority, if such failure to so file could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect; and the information contained in each of such filings is true, correct and complete in all material respects and (ii) has retained all records and documents required to be retained by it pursuant to any Law, ordinance, rule, regulation, order, policy, guideline or other requirement of any Governmental Authority, if the failure to so retain such records and documents could reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: the app permits the purchase of virtual currency ( `` virtual money '' ) and use of that virtual money to purchase virtual items or services that we expressly make available for use in the app ( `` virtual goods '' ) .

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: Form any Subsidiary (other than (i) Borrower forming Ultralife UK Holdco in connection with the Accutronics Acquisition and (ii) a Subsidiary, the formation of which shall have been consented to in advance in writing by Lender and which shall have satisfied certain conditions precedent as may be required by Lender in its Permitted Discretion), or enter into any partnership, joint venture or similar arrangement.

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 legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Administrative Agent may sell the Collateral without giving any warranties or representations as to the Collateral. The Administrative Agent may disclaim any warranties of title or the like. Each Grantor agrees that this procedure will not be considered to adversely affect the commercial reasonableness of any sale of the Collateral.

assistant: Warranties