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: Each Pledgor agrees that at any time and from time to time, at the expense of such Pledgor, the Pledgor shall promptly execute and deliver all further instruments and documents, and take all further action, that may be necessary or desirable, or that the Agent and/or the Pledgees may reasonably request, in order to perfect and protect any security interest granted or purported to be granted hereby or to enable the Agent and/or Pledgee to exercise and enforce their rights and remedies hereunder with respect to any Pledged Collateral. The Company agrees that at any time and from time to time, at the expense of the Company, the Company shall promptly execute and deliver all further instruments and documents, and take all further action, that may be necessary or desirable, or that the Agent and/or the Pledgees may reasonably request in order to perfect and protect any security interest granted or purported to be granted hereby or to enable the Agent and/or Pledgee to exercise and enforce their rights and remedies hereunder with respect to any Pledged Collateral. The Company shall not issue any additional securities to any Pledgor, unless the contemporaneous with such issuance, such securities are delivered to the Agent and pledged hereunder. Upon any such issuance, any such new securities shall be “Pledged Collateral” hereunder.

assistant: Further Assurances
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: interfered with and prevented him from receiving Nurse Fume’s recommended treatment for his asthma. See Estelle, 429 U.S. at 105, 97 S.Ct. 285; Durmer v. O’Carroll, 991 F.2d 64, 68 (3d Cir.1993). Even when taking as true Nurse Fume’s affidavit stating that she warned defendant that plaintiffs asthma could become worse or potentially life threatening, a reasonable jury cannot find that defendant acted with deliberate indifference. (D.I. 63, ex. A at ¶ 14) In particular, defendant could not have drawn an inference from Nurse Fume’s statement that a substantial risk of serious harm to plaintiff presently existed because she merely said plaintiffs asthma “could” worsen or become “potentially” life threatening. See Colburn v. Upper Darby Township, 946 F.2d 1017, 1024 (3d Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>); (Id.) Therefore, sufficient evidence is Options: A. holding that icecovered steps did not present a high likelihood of harm or severity of harm B. holding that deliberate indifference is not the mere possibility a harm will occur rather a strong likelihood C. holding that supervisors were not hable because they possessed no information indicating a strong likelihood of unconstitutional conduct by their subordinate D. recognizing that a case is ripe for determination if injury has occurred or is likely to occur the threat of harm must be direct and immediate rather than conjectural hypothetical or remote E. holding that likelihood of irreparable harm must be based on evidence in the record not unsupported and conclusory statements regarding harm the plaintiff might suffer

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that deliberate indifference is not the mere possibility a harm will occur rather a strong likelihood
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 Appellants contend that the accident report was not listed as an exhibit because the Appellee had admitted liability. The accident report became imperative only as rebuttal to the Appellee’s claims of insignificant damage resulting from the accident. Under these circumstances, and consistent with our conclusions regarding the severity of the lower court’s sanction for discovery violations on the issue of introduction of medical bills, we conclude that the trial court also abused its discretion and committed reversible error by excluding the accident report. The report was of “a critical nature, so that there is no reasonable assurance that the jury would have reached the same conclusion had the evidence been admitted.” Adams v. Fuqua Indus., Inc., 820 F.2d 271, 273 (8th Cir.1987) (<HOLDING>). IV. Conclusion Based upon the foregoing, we Options: A. holding exclusion was harmless error B. holding the exclusion of cumulative evidence was not prejudicial error C. holding in all cases that where the evidence of guilt was sufficient any error in the exclusion of lastminute evidence and testimony was harmless error D. holding that accident report was necessary to presentation of case and exclusion was in error E. holding exclusion was not ambiguous

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that accident report was necessary to presentation of case and exclusion was in error
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: is in the child's best interest; (h) that, after ... the child was returned to live in the child's own home, the parent ... refused or failed to give the child proper parental care and protection; or (i) the terms and conditions of safe relinguishment of a newborn child have been complied with.... Id. § 78A-6-507(1)(a)-@). 12 . Id. § 78A-6-507(1)(a). 13 . Id. § 78A-6-50700(00). 14 . See id. § 78A-6-506(3) ("[The welfare and best interest of the child {is] of paramount importance in determining whether termination of parental rights shall be ordered."); see also State ex rel. A.C.M., 2009 UT 30, ¶ 23, 221 P.3d 185 (stating that a best interest analysis is the second step in terminating parental rights). 15 . Uraw Cope Amn. § 78A-6-509(1)(a) (Supp. 2011). 16 . See id. § 78A-6-509(1) (<HOLDING>). 17 . See Urax Copp Ann. § 78A-6-507(1)(a) Options: A. recognizing this substantial interest in context of termination of parental rights B. holding that the district court should consider the totality of the circumstances in determining whether the patentee acted in subjective bad faith and should consider whether circumstantial evidence would support an inference of bad faith C. recognizing that a court is not limited in what it may consider in determining whether parental rights should be terminated D. holding that due process allows parental rights to be terminated only upon clear and convincing evidence of unfitness E. holding the parental rights of a child may not be terminated unless that parent has been represented by counsel at every critical stage of the proceedings

assistant: The best answer is C. recognizing that a court is not limited in what it may consider in determining whether parental rights should be terminated
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: a state for contributory infringement, because the state had waived its immunity under Parden v. Terminal Railway, 377 U.S. 184, 84 S.Ct. 1207, 12 L.Ed.2d 233 (1964)); Hercules, Inc. v. Minnesota State Highway Dep’t, 337 F.Supp. 795, 798, 172 USPQ 644, 647 (D.Minn.1972) (concluding that injunctive relief under Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 28 S.Ct. 441, 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908), but not monetary relief under Title 35, was available to a patentee for alleged infringement by a state); William C. Popper & Co v. Pennsylvania Liquor Control Bd., 16 F.Supp. 762, 763 (E.D.Pa.1936) (dismissing an infringement claim as barred by the Eleventh Amendment); Automobile Abstract & Title Co. v. Haggerty, 46 F.2d 86, 87-88 (E.D.Mich.1931) (same); Warren Bros. Co. v. Kibbe, 43 F.2d 582, 584 (D.Ore.1925) (<HOLDING>); cf. May v. Board of Comm’rs, 30 F. 250, 261 Options: A. holding that contributory trademark infringement requires some predicate act of infringement B. holding that ohio counties could be sued for patent infringement C. holding that alleged infringer waived privilege with respect to all documents pertaining to the infringement of the patent D. holding that knowledge of the patent is required for willful infringement E. holding that a state had waived its immunity to suit for patent infringement by agreeing to indemnify contractors for royalties owed due to their infringement of patents for paving materials

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a state had waived its immunity to suit for patent infringement by agreeing to indemnify contractors for royalties owed due to their infringement of patents for paving materials
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 LOI may be executed in one or more counterparts (including electronic counterparts), each of which shall be deemed to be an original document, but all such separate counterparts shall constitute only this LOI. The Parties shall perform their obligations under this LOI as independent contractors and nothing contained in this LOI shall be construed to be inconsistent with such relationship or status. The Parties shall neither amend this LOI, except by mutual written agreement nor assign the rights and/or obligations under this LOI to any third party in any manner without the prior written consent of the other Party.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Virgin Atl. Airways, Ltd. v. National Mediation Bd., 956 F.2d 1245, 1255 (2d Cir.1992)). 14 . Grand Crossing, L.P. v. United States Underwriters Ins. Co., No. 03 Civ. 5429, 2008 WL 4525400, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 6, 2008) (quoting S.E.C. v. Ashbury Capital Partners, No. 00 Civ. 7898, 2001 WL 604044, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. May 31, 2001)). Accord Commerce Funding Corp. v. Comprehensive Habilitation Servs., Inc., 233 F.R.D. 355, 361 (S.D.N.Y.2005) ("[A] movant may not raise on a motion for reconsideration any matter that it did not raise previously to the court on the underlying motion sought to be reconsidered.”). 15 . United States v. Treacy, No. 08 Cr. 0366, 2009 WL 47496, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 8, 2009) (quotation omitted). Accord Shrader v. CSX Transp. Inc., 70 F.3d 255, 257 (2d Cir.1995) (<HOLDING>). 16 . Makas v. Orlando, No. 06 Civ. 14305, Options: A. holding that the bia may deny a motion to reopen on the ground that the movant has not established prima facie eligibility for the underlying relief sought B. holding that constitutional questions will not be decided if case can be decided on other grounds C. holding that district court lacked power to decide personal jurisdiction issue already decided by district of columbia superior court D. holding that a party may not use a rule 60b motion as an occasion to relitigate its case E. holding that a court will deny the motion when the movant seeks solely to relitigate an issue already decided

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that a court will deny the motion when the movant seeks solely to relitigate an issue already decided
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: 697 S.W.2d 332, 334 (Tenn.1985) (same). In finding specific jurisdiction, the district court relied on the following facts: (1) Lloyds sent three wire transfers from Hercules Holdings to the account of Space Age Industries in Erwin, Tennessee (Hogsed’s account); (2) Tennessee residents wired funds to The Bond Partnership at Lloyds; (3) Lloyds and its attorney responded to letters from Harris and other individuals in Tennessee about this litigation; and (4) Lloyds faxed a two-page bank statement to Hogsed detailing numerous transactions involving the transfer of substantial funds from Tennessee customers to the accounts of Hercules Holdings at Lloyds. The d response to communications initiated by Harris and others in Tennessee. Cf. Rice v. Karsch, 154 Fed.Appx. 454, 460 (6th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). See also Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 91 F.3d at Options: A. holding that easements using terms telephone telegraph and communications could properly be utilized for both internal communications and for thirdparty voice and data communications B. holding that defendants communications sent into tennessee did not constitute purposeful availment because all were in response to communications initiated by the plaintiff C. holding that internet purchase of one compact disc by plaintiffs counsel did not constitute purposeful availment D. holding ban preempted by federal communications commission regulations E. holding that subsection b did not apply because the communications at issue were not being stored by an electronic communication service

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that defendants communications sent into tennessee did not constitute purposeful availment because all were in response to communications initiated by the plaintiff
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Upon the terms and subject to the conditions of this Agreement, Seller agrees to sell, convey, assign, transfer and deliver to the Company, and the Company agrees to purchase from Seller, (i) 30,000 Company Shares (the " Purchased Shares "), free and clear of any and all mortgages, pledges, encumbrances, liens, security interests, options, charges, claims, deeds of trust, deeds to secure debt, title retention agreements, rights of first refusal or offer, limitations on voting rights, proxies, voting agreements, limitations on transfer or other agreements or claims of any kind or nature whatsoever (collectively, " Liens ") and (ii) Options (as set forth on Schedule 1 hereto) to purchase 6,667 Company Shares.

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: Borrower has good, marketable, indefeasible and insurable fee simple title to the real property rights comprising part of the Property and good title to the balance of the Property owned by it, free and clear of all Liens whatsoever except the Permitted Encumbrances. TRS Entity has good, marketable and indefeasible leasehold title to the Property pursuant to the TRS Lease, free and clear of all Liens whatsoever, except the Permitted Encumbrances. Borrower or where applicable, TRS Entity, has the right and is lawfully authorized to sell, convey or encumber the Property subject only to the Permitted Encumbrances. The Security Instrument, when properly recorded in the appropriate records, together with any Uniform Commercial Code financing statements required to be filed in connection therewith, will create (i) a valid, first priority, perfected lien on Borrower’s and TRS Entity’s right, title and interest to the Property, subject only to Permitted Encumbrances and (ii) perfected security interests in and to, and perfected collateral assignments of, all personalty (including the Leases), all in accordance with the terms thereof, in each case subject only to any Permitted Encumbrances. There are no mechanics’, materialman’s or other similar liens or claims which have been filed for work, labor or materials affecting the Property which are or may be liens prior to, or equal or coordinate with, the lien of the Security Instrument. The Property is free from all due and unpaid Taxes and Other Charges. None of the Permitted Encumbrances, individually or in the aggregate, materially interfere with the benefits of the security intended to be provided by the Security Instrument and this Agreement, materially and adversely affect the value of the Property, impair the use or operations of the Property or impair Borrower’s ability to pay its obligations in a timely manner.

assistant: Titles
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 having received the executed counterparts of (i) this Amendment executed by the Borrower, Holdings, the Administrative Agent, Lenders constituting Required Lenders (as defined in the Credit Agreement), the Additional Term B-3 Lender, each other Term B-3 Lender and each Amendment No. 2 Extending Revolving Lender and (ii) the Affirmation Agreement, substantially in the form of Exhibit B hereto, dated as of the Amendment No. 2 Effective Date, by and among Holdings, the Borrower, certain Subsidiaries of Holdings party thereto and the Administrative Agent, executed by Holdings, the Borrower, the Guarantors and the Administrative Agent.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Plaintiffs still believed the fees being charged were too high. From July 1, 1997 until the agreement terminated in late 1999, Plaintiffs paid the higher fees s ere decided unilaterall ment may be amended only in writing, by the agreement of the parties.” The Agreement does not require that amendments be signed. See T.R. Mills Contractors, Inc. v. WRH Enters., LLC, 93 S.W.3d 861, 865-66 (Tenn.Ct.App.2002) (a written agreement does not have to be signed to be binding). BCBST memorialized the terms in writing and sent the proposed written amendment to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs paid the amounts specified by the proposed written amendment but refused to sign it. The two requisites of amendment under the Agreement were met: written terms and the agreement of the parties to amend. See id. (<HOLDING>). Although a signed writing is a superior way Options: A. holding that when a contract is signed by one party but not the other the manifestation of consent by the nonsigning party is sufficient to bind that party B. holding that an arbitration agreement enforceable against party who signed the agreement even where the other party did not sign it because generally it is enough that the party against whom the contract is sought to be enforced signs it C. holding that validity of contract may be established by one or more writings signed by party to be charged D. holding that successful party is one who is the ultimate prevailing party in the litigation E. holding that parol evidence is admissible to show that an individual who signed a contract but is not named in the body is a party to the contract

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that when a contract is signed by one party but not the other the manifestation of consent by the nonsigning party is sufficient to bind that party
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: • selling a user account or playlist , or otherwise accepting any compensation , financial or otherwise , to influence the name of an account or playlist or the content included on an account or playlist .

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: (a) If Tenant requests Landlord’s consent and Landlord fails or refuses to give such consent, Tenant shall not be entitled to any damages for any withholding by Landlord of its consent (except in an instance where a court of competent jurisdiction or an arbitrator determining whether or not Landlord has reasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed its consent has determined that Landlord acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner, maliciously or in bad faith), it being intended that, other than in the instances described in the preceding parenthetical, Tenant’s sole remedy shall be an action for specific performance or injunction or arbitration in accordance with the provisions of Section 8.09(b) , and that such remedy shall be available only in those cases where this Lease provides that Landlord shall not (or as a matter of Law, Landlord may not) unreasonably withhold, condition or delay its consent.

assistant: Arbitration
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, whether it unreasonably interferes with work performance' or, as here, a tenant’s living conditions.”) (quoting Kortan v. California Youth Authority, 217 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir.2000)); DiCenso v. Cisneros, 96 F.3d 1004, 1008 (7th Cir.1996) (hostile housing environment cause of action is analyzed under the more familiar Title VII standard, which requires that for sexual harassment to be actionable, it must be sufficiently severe or pervasive that it "unreasonably interferes with use and enjoyment of the premises”); Honce v. Vigil, 1 F.3d 1085 (10th Cir.1993) (finding that sexual harassment creates an actionable form of housing discrimination and incorporating Title VII standards into analysis); Cavalieri-Conway v. L. Butterman & Associates, 992 F.Supp. 995, 1007 (N.D.Ill. 1998) (<HOLDING>). 15 . Courts have concluded virtually Options: A. holding that noneconomic injury resulting from a hostile environment based on discriminatory sexual harassment is actionable under title vii B. holding that a claim for sexual harassment is cognizable under two theories 1 allegations supporting a hostile environment claim andor 2 allegations supporting a conditional tenancy or quid pro quo claim which accuses housing management of premising a lease or lease conditions on the exchange of sexual favors and stating that courts rely on a title vii analysis in reviewing hostile environment claims of sexual harassment under the fha C. holding that the allegations of plaintiffs coemployees of sexual harassment by manager were irrelevant to plaintiffs hostile work environment claim absent evidence that plaintiff was contemporaneously aware of the alleged harassment D. holding that harassment of women working alongside plaintiff was relevant to question of creation of environment viola tive of title vii although vinson was a sexual harassment case the principles underlying a hostile environment theory are equally applicable in sexual harassment and racial harassment cases E. holding that a charge that alleged discrimination on the basis of sex did not support a complaint for hostile environment sexual harassment

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that a claim for sexual harassment is cognizable under two theories 1 allegations supporting a hostile environment claim andor 2 allegations supporting a conditional tenancy or quid pro quo claim which accuses housing management of premising a lease or lease conditions on the exchange of sexual favors and stating that courts rely on a title vii analysis in reviewing hostile environment claims of sexual harassment under the fha
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 signing below, Employee represents and warrants that Employee: (a) has carefully read and understands the terms of this Release; (b) is entering into the Release knowingly, voluntarily and of Employee’s own free will; (c) understands its terms and significance and intends to abide by its provisions without exception; (d) has not made any false statements or representations in connection with this Release; and (e) has not transferred or assigned to any person or entity not a party to this Release any claim or right released hereunder, and Employee agrees to indemnify the Company and hold it harmless against any claim (including claims for attorney’s fees or costs actually incurred, regardless of whether litigation has commenced) based on or arising out of any alleged assignment or transfer of a claim by Employee.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: “two to three times every single week,” every week for one year. Thus, appellant purchased, and personally possessed upon its receipt, at least a quarter of a kilogram of crack each week, which amounts to at least 13 kilograms of crack for the year. It is well settled that the possession of drugs in a quantity “greater than the supply ordinarily possessed by a narcotics user for his personal use, is a circumstance which, standing alone, may be sufficient to support a finding of intent to distribute.” Hunter v. Commonwealth, 213 Va. 569, 570, 193 S.E.2d 779, 780 (1973). Appellant’s possession of 13 kilograms of crack over the course of a year is certainly sufficient to infer he intended to distribute it. See, e.g., Gregory v. Commonwealth, 22 Va.App. 100, 110, 468 S.E.2d 117, 122 (1996) (<HOLDING>). In addition, when viewed in the light most Options: A. holding that the defendants prior distribution of crack was admissible to prove that he had intent and knowledge regarding crack found in a gym bag B. holding the large quantity of drugs sufficient evidence of intent to distribute C. holding that evidence that the accused possessed 37 grams of crack was sufficient to prove he had the intent to distribute it D. holding two prior convictions for distribution of crack relevant to show intent to distribute the crack found in defendants possession E. holding that a federal agents expert testimony regarding the characteristics of crack cocaine and the methods of its distribution was admissible and highly relevant in helping the jury resolve the central issue of whether the defendant possessed crack cocaine with intent to distribute

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that evidence that the accused possessed 37 grams of crack was sufficient to prove he had the intent to distribute it
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: an insurer to await the filing of a complaint against its insured will force insurers to defend claims that are unlikely to result in a duty to indemnify. We recognize the reality of Patrons’s concerns. We conclude, however, that the rationale supporting the comparison test outweighs those concerns. See Dingwell, 414 A.2d at 227. “We have always recognized that the application of the comparison test will occasionally requ dgment action before the injured claimant filed an action against the insured. Dolley, 669 A.2d at 1321. Rather than rejecting the action on ripeness grounds, we determined the insurer’s duly to defend vel non on the basis of what the corn-plaint might have alleged, in view of the parties' stipulation. Id. at 1323. 5 . See State Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bragg, 589 A.2d at 38 (<HOLDING>); Perreault v. Maine Bonding & Cas. Co., 568 Options: A. holding insurers duty to defend is determined by allegations in the petition B. holding that insurance company could sue in insureds name following assignment of insureds interest against tortfeasor C. holding that an insurers duty to defend arises from the allegations in the complaint against the insured D. holding insurers right to subrogation arises only upon the insurers showing that the sum of the insureds recovery from the insurer and from persons legally responsible for the injury exceeds the insureds loss E. holding that insureds criminal convictions were sufficient to preclude relitigation of the issue of the insureds subjective intent for purposes of evaluating the insurers duty to defend

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that insureds criminal convictions were sufficient to preclude relitigation of the issue of the insureds subjective intent for purposes of evaluating the insurers duty to defend
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 Assignment shall remain in effect until the Debt and all other obligations evidenced by the Note or advanced under the Loan Documents are paid in full, or this Assignment is voluntarily released by Lender. Upon payment in full of the Debt and the delivery and recording of a satisfaction or discharge of Security Instrument duly executed by Lender, this Assignment shall become null and void and shall be of no further force and effect.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: remember , at the outset of these terms of use , where we discussed how you were `` licensed '' the right to use world of warcraft , and that your license was `` limited '' ?

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: GUARANTOR HEREBY (a) IRREVOCABLY SUBMITS AND CONSENTS TO THE EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF THE STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS LOCATED IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF NEW YORK WITH RESPECT TO ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING ARISING OUT OF THIS GUARANTY AND/OR THE OTHER LOAN DOCUMENTS, THE GUARANTOR OBLIGATIONS OR ANY MATTER ARISING THEREFROM OR RELATING THERETO, AND (b) WAIVES ANY OBJECTIONS WHICH IT MAY NOW OR HEREAFTER HAVE BASED ON VENUE OR FORUM NON CONVENIENS WITH RESPECT THERETO. IN ANY SUCH ACTION OR PROCEEDING, GUARANTOR WAIVES PERSONAL SERVICE OF THE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT OR OTHER PROCESS AND PAPERS THEREIN AND AGREES THAT THE SERVICE THEREOF MAY BE MADE BY CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, DIRECTED TO GUARANTOR AT HIS ADDRESS SET FORTH HEREIN OR OTHER ADDRESS THEREOF OF WHICH LENDER HAS RECEIVED NOTICE AS PROVIDED IN THIS GUARANTY. NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING, GUARANTOR CONSENTS TO THE COMMENCEMENT BY LENDER OF ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING IN ANY OTHER JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE ITS RIGHTS AND GUARANTOR WAIVES ANY OBJECTION WHICH IT MAY NOW OR HEREAFTER HAVE BASED ON VENUE AND/OR FORUM NON CONVENIENS OF ANY SUCH ACTION OR PROCEEDING.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If one or more provisions of this Purchase and Sale Agreement are held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other provision of this Purchase and Sale Agreement, which shall remain in full force and effect, and the parties hereto shall replace such invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision with a new provision permitted by Applicable Law and having an economic effect as close as possible to the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision. Any provision of this Purchase and Sale Agreement held invalid, illegal or unenforceable only in part or degree by a court of competent jurisdiction shall remain in full force and effect to the extent not held invalid, illegal or unenforceable.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: To the Knowledge of the Company, the Company has, or has the right to use, all patents, patent applications, trademarks, trademark applications, service marks, trade names, trade secrets, inventions, copyrights, licenses and other intellectual property rights and similar rights as necessary or required for use in connection with its business as currently conducted or currently proposed to be conducted (collectively, the “ Intellectual Property Rights ”). The Company has not received a notice (written or otherwise) that any of, the Intellectual Property Rights has expired, terminated or been abandoned, or is expected to expire or terminate or be abandoned, within two (2) years from the date of this Agreement. The Company has not received any written notice of a claim or otherwise has any Knowledge that the Intellectual Property Rights violate or infringe upon the rights of any Person, has not received any written notice of any claim that any Intellectual Property Right owned or controlled by a third party would be or is infringed or misappropriated by the manufacture, use, sale, offer for sale or importation of the Product (as defined in the Option and Collaboration Agreement) and, to the Company’s Knowledge, the manufacture, use, sale, offer for sale or importation of the Product would not and does not infringe or misappropriate any Intellectual Property Right owned or controlled by a third party. The Company has taken reasonable security measures to protect the secrecy, confidentiality and value of all of its Intellectual Property Rights, except where failure to do so could not, individually or in the aggregate, reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Intellectual Property
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 Non-Compete contain all of the agreements and understandings between the parties hereto with respect to the employment of Executive by the Bank, and supersede all prior agreements, arrangements and understandings related to the subject matter hereof. No oral agreements or written correspondence shall be held to affect the provisions hereof. No representation, promise, inducement or statement of intention has been made by either party that is not set forth in this Agreement or the Non-Compete, and neither party shall be bound by or liable for any alleged representation, promise, inducement or statement of intention not so set forth. Not in limitation of the foregoing, this Agreement supersedes and replaces the Executive’s employment arrangement with the Bank in effect prior to the date hereof, except that Executive shall remain entitled to receive any compensation earned but not yet paid thereunder.

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: both instances the district court overruled the objections. 17 . Bonner contends that the government did not qualify or proffer the police officers as expert witnesses, and that their testimony must, therefore, be reviewed as opinion testimony of lay witnesses. We disagree. "If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise.” Fed.R.Evid. 702 (emphasis added). The record reflects that t officer’s testimony to indicate that Bonner’s actions were inconsistent with his claim that he was an innocent bystander. See Washington, 44 F.3d at 1283 & n. 44 (<HOLDING>). 20 . Bonner also contends that the officers’ Options: A. holding that the district court was within its discretion not to order disclosure of the governments confidential informant where the informant only helped orchestrate the search that led to discovery of incriminating evidence not the crimes themselves and could not testify to any relevant fact B. holding that because violence and danger are inherent in drug trafficking activity the court can reasonably infer that the informant cooperated under an implied assurance of confidentiality C. holding that expert testimony regarding the structure of drug trafficking organizations was inadmissible in a nonconspiracy importation case D. holding five expert opinions by two government agents and the confidential informant regarding the operations and methods of drug trafficking not impermissible profile evidence because it was not offered for that purpose E. recognizing the connection between guns and drug trafficking

assistant: The best answer is D. holding five expert opinions by two government agents and the confidential informant regarding the operations and methods of drug trafficking not impermissible profile evidence because it was not offered for that purpose
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: Other than consummating the transactions contemplated hereunder, such Purchaser has not, nor has any Person acting on behalf of or pursuant to any understanding with such Purchaser, directly or indirectly executed any purchases or sales, including Short Sales, of the securities of the Company during the period commencing as of the time that such Purchaser first received a term sheet (written or oral) from the Company or any other Person representing the Company setting forth the material terms of the transactions contemplated hereunder and ending immediately prior to the execution hereof. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the case of a Purchaser that is a multi-managed investment vehicle whereby separate portfolio managers manage separate portions of such Purchaser’s assets and the portfolio managers have no direct knowledge of the investment decisions made by the portfolio managers managing other portions of such Purchaser’s assets, the representation set forth above shall only apply with respect to the portion of assets managed by the portfolio manager that made the investment decision to purchase the Securities covered by this Agreement. Other than to other Persons party to this Agreement or to such Purchaser’s representatives, including, without limitation, its officers, directors, partners, legal and other advisors, employees, agents and Affiliates, such Purchaser has maintained the confidentiality of all disclosures made to it in connection with this transaction (including the existence and terms of this transaction). Notwithstanding the foregoing, for the avoidance of doubt, nothing contained herein shall constitute a representation or warranty against, or a prohibition of, any actions with respect to the borrowing of, arrangement to borrow, identification of the availability of, and/or securing of, securities of the Company in order for such Buyer (or its broker or other financial representative) to effect Short Sales or similar transactions in the future.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Except as expressly permitted under this Agreement, neither the Borrower nor any of its Subsidiaries or Affiliates shall use any portion of the proceeds of the Loans, either directly or indirectly, for the purpose of purchasing any securities.

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 following U.S. Supreme Court case excerpt and classify it into the correct legal issue area. Excerpt: 411 U.S. 618 93 S.Ct. 2156 36 L.Ed.2d 541 Frank X. GACAv.UNITED STATES. No. 72-6011. Supreme Court of the United States May 7, 1973 On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner was convicted in United States District Court of illegal wire-tapping under 18 U.S.C. § 2511. His appeal was dismissed for want of timely prosecution when he failed to pay a $25 filing fee. Petitioner contends that he thought payment of the fee unnecessary because he had been granted leave to appeal in forma pauperis by the District Judge. 2 In his memorandum before this Court, the Solicitor General states that the United States does not oppose a remand to reinstate the appeal in the exercise of this Court's supervisory powers in order to avoid possible injustice and the possibility of collateral attack upon the conviction. In light of this representation, and upon our independent examination of the record, the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for certiorari are granted. Judgment vacated and the case is vacated and remanded with instructions that the appeal be reinstated. 3 It is so ordered. 4 Mr. Justice WHITE and Mr. Justice REHNQUIST dissent.

assistant: 2
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 Parent Borrower has no Subsidiaries, except those Subsidiaries which are (a) identified in Item 6.8 of the Disclosure Schedule or (b) permitted to have been organized or acquired in accordance with Sections 7.2.5 or 7.2.10 .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: protected under the doctrine of intergovernmental immunities”); Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co., 157 U.S. 429, 583-86, 15 S.Ct. 673, 39 L.Ed. 759 (1895), modified, 158 U.S. 601, 15 S.Ct. 912, 39 L.Ed. 1108 (1895), overruled in part by U.S. Const. amend. XVI, South Carolina v. Baker, 485 U.S. 505, 515-27, 108 S.Ct. 1355, 99 L.Ed.2d 592 (1988). 9 . From 1938 until the modern Code’s enactment, state authorization was required for plan confirmation. See Act of Aug. 16, 1937, Pub.L. No. 302, ch. 657, sec. 83(e)(6), 50 Stat. . 653, 658 (codified at 11 U.S.C. § 403(e)(6) (1937) (conditioning confirmation of a plan on, inter alia, petitioner being "authorized by law to take all action necessary to be taken by it to carry out the plan”)); Bekins, 304 U.S. at 49, 58 S.Ct. 811 (<HOLDING>); accord 11 U.S.C. § 404 (1976). Puerto Rico's Options: A. holding that law in 403e6 refers to state law B. holding state law irrelevant C. holding that even though 24 only refers to actions in state court it applies to state claims brought in federal court D. holding that federal courts presiding over causes of action created by state law should apply state substantive law but federal procedural law E. holding that the plaintiffs state law claims are preempted by federal law

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that law in 403e6 refers to state law
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: For all purposes of this Agreement, all communications, including notices, consents, requests or approvals, required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given when hand delivered or dispatched by electronic facsimile or email transmission (with receipt thereof orally confirmed), or five business days after having been mailed by United States registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid or one business day after having been sent for next‑day delivery by a nationally recognized overnight courier service, addressed to the Company (to the attention of the Secretary of the Company) and to Indemnitee at the applicable address shown on the signature page hereto, or to such other address as any party hereto may have furnished to the other in writing and in accordance herewith, except that notices of changes of address will be effective only upon receipt.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: days of receiving the notice of right to sue). Ms. Scott never served the defendant in that case, and the court dismissed it without prejudice on January 21, 2000. Ms. Scott filed a second lawsuit on July 21, 2000. However, Ms. Scott also did not serve the defendant in the second case, and the court dismissed it without prejudice on February 6, 2001. This circuit has held “that the filing of a complaint that is dismissed without prejudice does not toll the statutory filing period of Title VII.” Brown, 926 F.2d at 961. We reasoned that “as a general rule, a voluntary dismissal without prejudice leaves the parties as though the action had never been brought.” Id. Other courts have applied this rule to ADA claims, see Chico-Velez v. Roche Prods., Inc., 139 F.3d 56, 59 (1st Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). As the district court observed, application Options: A. holding that a review committee of the kansas board for discipline of attorneys had the authority to dismiss a complaint against an attorney with or without prejudice and when dismissal was ordered without specifying the nature of the dismissal the dismissal was without prejudice to the filing of later proceedings on the same matter B. holding that the dismissal without prejudice of the plaintiffs first action doomed his ada claim because the ninetyday filing period had run C. holding that proper remedy for failure to exhaust is dismissal of the claim without prejudice D. holding borough could not appeal dismissal of complaint without prejudice because dismissal without prejudice is comparable to a nonsuit under the former practice of lavf E. holding district court had no authority to require plaintiffs to obtain courts permission to dismiss defendant who had not served answer or motion for summary judgment as plaintiffs had absolute right to dismissal without prejudice and thus court could not sanction plaintiffs for filing notice of voluntary dismissal rather than motion

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that the dismissal without prejudice of the plaintiffs first action doomed his ada claim because the ninetyday filing period had run