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: This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State or Commonwealth where the Facility is located as to, including, but not limited to, matters of validity, construction, effect and performance but exclusive of its conflicts of laws provisions.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: All notices, requests, consents, claims, demands, waivers and other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given: (a) when delivered by hand (with written confirmation of receipt); (b) when received by the addressee if sent by a nationally recognized overnight courier (receipt requested); (c) on the date sent by facsimile of a PDF document (with confirmation of transmission) if sent during normal business hours of the recipient, and on the next Business Day if sent after normal business hours of the recipient; or (d) on the third day after the date mailed, by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid. Such communications must be sent to the respective parties at the addresses indicated below (or at such other address for a party as shall be specified in a notice given in accordance with this Section 11 ).

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: by needlessly delaying the trial. He had never requested to substitute counsel previously and had no history of “gaming” the system. The trial judge repeatedly referred to Carlson’s motion as “late,” but considering that the charges against him had been pending such a relatively short time and that he filed his motion to substitute immediately after he retained new counsel, the timing of his motion was certainly understandable. Finally, Carlson was not asking for a long continuance. Notably, we do not know how long Ms. Shellow would have needed to prepare because the trial judge never asked her. Apparently, any delay would have been unacceptable to the trial judge. That sort of rigidity can only be characterized as arbitrary. See, e.g., Linton v. Penny 656 F.2d 207, 212 (6th Cir.1981) (<HOLDING>). The State’s argument that Carlson was not Options: A. holding that the length of a continuance was not unreasonable because of defendants part in extending the delay B. holding that when determining whether a delay in prosecution violates a defendants right to a speedy trial courts must consider the length of the delay the reason for the delay whether the defendant asserted his rights and the resulting prejudice to the defendant C. holding that one minute delay between the initial stop of the defendant and the officers question regarding whether the defendant had any illegal substances and his request to search the defendants car was sufficiently contemporaneous with the issuance of the citation such that there was no appreciable delay and certainly no unreasonable delay D. holding a fivemonth delay in searching a computer did not invalidate the search because there was no showing that the delay caused a lapse in probable cause that it created prejudice to the defendant or that officers acted in bad faith E. holding that in a case involving serious charges a trial judge acted arbitrarily in denying a continuance where there was no evidence of a scheme to delay the trial no showing of inconvenience to the witnesses opposing counsel or the court and the length of the requested delay was not unreasonable

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that in a case involving serious charges a trial judge acted arbitrarily in denying a continuance where there was no evidence of a scheme to delay the trial no showing of inconvenience to the witnesses opposing counsel or the court and the length of the requested delay was not unreasonable
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: was not necessary. Moreover, he claims, their presence destroyed any presumption of their innocence and led the jury to think that the defendants were dangerous criminals. Mr. Treesh requests a new trial. The decisions of a district court concerning security in the courtroom are reviewed deferentially. A trial judge who is confronted with a potentially disruptive defendant or witness must consider the security of his courtroom and of all those who are in it. As we discussed in Lemons v. Skidmore, 985 F.2d 354 (7th Cir.1993), the trial judge has wide discretion in determining what is necessary to maintain the security of the courtroom. Id. at 357-58. However, decisions in this matter are the judge’s responsibility; he “may not delegate his discretion to another party.” Id. at 358 (<HOLDING>). Moreover, a defendant is entitled to the Options: A. holding that an inmate has no right to any particular prison job but prison officials cannot discriminate against him on the basis of his race in work assignments B. holding that in prison inmate civil rights action trial judge should hold hearing to determine what if any restraints are necessary C. holding that a constitutional violation was too remote a consequence of the defendants action to hold them responsible under the federal civil rights law D. holding that prison conditions are those aspects of prison life affecting the entire prison population E. holding that an inmate has a first amendment right to file grievances against prison officials

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that in prison inmate civil rights action trial judge should hold hearing to determine what if any restraints are necessary
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 any fiscal year or other accounting period for each Facility Lessee or Capella Holdings, balance sheets, statements of operations and capital accounts, and statements of cash flows setting forth in comparative form the corresponding figures for the year-earlier fiscal period.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: certification — on its belief — that a prisoner is a “sexually dangerous person” and provides no time limit in which a civil commitment hearing must be held after a certification has been issued. If this pre-commitment detention, which requires no judicial determination and minimal procedural safeguards, constitutes imprisonment, then the constitutionality of the Act is open to question. See Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607, 612, 123 S.Ct. 2446, 156 L.Ed.2d 544 (2003) (including among ex post facto laws “[e]very law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed” (quoting Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. 386, 390, 3 Dall. 386, 1 L.Ed. 648 (1798))); Foucha v. Louisiana, 504 U.S. 71, 86, 112 S.Ct. 1780, 118 L.Ed.2d 437 (1992) (<HOLDING>); Hill v. United States ex rel. Wampler, 298 Options: A. holding that in reviewing a defendants motion for judgment of acquittal based on insanity which the defendant must prove by clear and convincing evidence the court must determine whether no reasonable jury could have failed to find that the defendants criminal insanity at the time of the offense was established by clear and convincing evidence B. holding that fraud on the court must be supported by clear unequivocal and convincing evidence C. holding in part that party seeking reformation of deed must show the original intent or agreement of parties by clear and convincing evidence D. holding that despite the lack of a statutory requirement that severe child abuse be shown by clear and convincing evidence due to the consequences of such a finding the clear and convincing standard must be applied E. holding that the state must establish insanity and dangerousness by clear and convincing evidence in order to confine an insane convict beyond his criminal sentence when the basis for his original confinement no longer exists

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the state must establish insanity and dangerousness by clear and convincing evidence in order to confine an insane convict beyond his criminal sentence when the basis for his original confinement no longer exists
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: testimony is necessary to prove the cause of asthma. Praytor v. Ford Motor Co., 97 S.W.3d 237, 241 (TexApp.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, no pet.); Hernandez v. Tex. Employers Ins. Assoc., 783 S.W.2d 250, 253 (TexApp.-Corpus Christi 1989, no writ). It is also required to prove that employment aggravated a pre-existing disease, such as asth ma. See Hernandez, 783 S.W.2d at 253 ; Houston Gen. Ins. Co. v. Pegues, 514 S.W.2d 492, 495 (Tex.Civ.App.-Texarkana 1974, writ ref d n.r.e.). Nonphysicians may qualify as medical experts by virtue of special experience. E.g., Ponder v. Texarkana Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 840 S.W.2d 476, 478 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, writ denied); see also Harris County Hosp. Dist. v. Estrada, 872 S.W.2d 759, 762 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1993, writ denied) (<HOLDING>). However, in her response to the motion for Options: A. holding expert testimony not required to defeat summary judgment in medical malpractice suit because defendant doctors admissions were sufficient to establish the standard of care B. recognizing that a plaintiff must produce a medical expert to testify as to causation in all but the most selfevident medical malpractice actions C. holding that a doctor was qualified under daubert to give an expert opinion on standard of medical care based on thirty years of experience as a practicing boardcertified cardiologist and his review of the medical records D. holding that nurse who is familiar with the standard of care at another similar hospital can qualify by experience to testify as a medical expert in a medical malpractice action E. holding expert report requirement fulfilled in claim against nurse by providing expert report of nurse as to standard of care and expert report of medical doctor as to causation

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that nurse who is familiar with the standard of care at another similar hospital can qualify by experience to testify as a medical expert in a medical malpractice action
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: If any term, condition, or provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any party or circumstances will, at any time or to any extent be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such term, condition or provision to parties or circumstances other than those to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, will not be affected thereby, and each term, condition and provision of this Agreement will be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: without limiting the preceding sentence , you will also have the right to litigate any dispute other than a litigable action , if you provide academia.edu with written notice of your desire to do so by email or regular mail at 251 kearny st , 5th floor , san francisco ca 94108 within thirty ( 30 ) days following the date you first agree to these terms ( such notice , an `` arbitration opt-out notice '' ) .

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: This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, including via email in “portable document format” (“.pdf”) form transmission, all of which shall be considered one and the same agreement and shall become effective when two or more counterparts have been signed by each of the Parties and delivered to the other Party, it being understood that all parties need not sign the same counterpart.

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: origin, false or misleading description of fact, or false or misleading representation of fact, which— (B) in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities, or geographic origin of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activities, shall be liable in a civil action by an person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act. 11 . The parties have not commented on whether PSI's letter to a potential representative can constitute "advertising” within the meaning of the act. It is not entirely clear whether the false advertising provision of § 43(a) would reach the letter to which plaintiff objects. See Mobius Management Systems v. Fourth Dimension Software, 880 F.Supp. 1005, 1019-1021 (S.D.N.Y.1994) (<HOLDING>). For the purposes of this decision, I assume, Options: A. holding that plaintiffs proof of increase in defendants sales and a corresponding decrease in plaintiffs sales testimony from a consumer witness that she changed products based on defendants false advertising and survey evidence of consumer confusion was enough to prove a likelihood of competitive injury resulting from the defendants advertising B. holding that false advertising sent to one potential consumer violated the act and distinguishing cases in which the alleged advertisement was held to be not actionable because it did not reach potential consumers C. holding in a false advertising case under the lanham act that a proposed disclaimer would not suffice to cure the misleadingness of an advertising claim D. holding that defendants statement that it owned the rights to a trademark did not give rise to a false advertising claim under the lanham act E. holding that both lanham act false advertising claim and a false advertising claim made under section 349 or section 350 require a showing that the advertisement was false or misleading

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that false advertising sent to one potential consumer violated the act and distinguishing cases in which the alleged advertisement was held to be not actionable because it did not reach potential consumers
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: set of disclosures found in the prior art with respect to claim l’s diverting limitation than to claim 24’s diverting limitation. Compare Petition for Inter Partes Review at 47, IPR2014-01133 (P.T.A.B. July 10, 2014), Paper No. 1, with id. at 51. In another example, in the Petitioner’s Reply to the Board, HTC argued that “CCE’s statement that ... D’Aviera does not disclose anything . .•. that could perform the intervening diverting step is misguided. The language of claim 1 does not preclude the same structure from performing the diverting step and the controlling step.” J.A. 570-71 (emphasis added) (quotation marks, citation, and alteration omitted). And significantly, in its Final Written Decision, the Board also addressed claim 1 and claim 24 separately. See J.A. (Fed. Cir. 1983) (<HOLDING>). And the same approach is appropriate both in Options: A. holding that a court cannot construe claims to read an express limitation out of the claim or render it meaningless B. holding that in the case where patentee was attempting to argue that parallel meant perpendicular with respect to a particular claim and a claim ended with an incomplete limitation the claims at issue were indefinite C. holding that limitations from the specification should not be read into the claims D. holding that the argument that an additional limitation be read into claims 1 3 and 4 was only correct with respect to claim 1 and thus only claim 1 was invalid E. holding improper reading into claims a limitation appearing only in the specification

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that the argument that an additional limitation be read into claims 1 3 and 4 was only correct with respect to claim 1 and thus only claim 1 was invalid
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: as part of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), provides that “[n]o action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions under section 1983 of this title, or any other Federal law, by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.” 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a). The Eleventh Circuit has held that this section mandates exhaustion of a prisoner’s administrative remedies and that courts no longer have discretion to waive the exhaustion 1999) (same); Johnson v. Garraghty, 57 F.Supp.2d 321 (E.D.Va.1999) (same); Beeson v. Fishkill Correctional Facility, 28 F.Supp.2d 884 (S.D.N.Y.1998) (same); Moore v. Smith, 18 F.Supp.2d 1360 (N.D.Ga.1998) (same); with Wright v. Dee, 54 F.Supp.2d 199 (S.D.N.Y.1999) (<HOLDING>); White v. Fauver, 19 F.Supp.2d 305 Options: A. holding that excessive force claims are to be treated under the fourth amendment B. recognizing that issue exhaustion requirement and requirement exhaustion of remedies are different C. holding that excessive force claims are not subject to exhaustion requirement D. holding that inquiry as to whether officers are entitled to qualified immunity for use of excessive force is distinct from inquiry on the merits of the excessive force claim E. holding exhaustion requirement inapplicable when requiring exhaustion would be futile

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that excessive force claims are not subject to exhaustion requirement
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: The Company hereby agrees to engage Executive and the Executive hereby agrees to serve the Company, on the terms and conditions set forth herein, for the period commencing on the date hereof and expiring on October 15, 2020 (the “ Initial Term ”) unless sooner terminated as hereinafter set forth. This Agreement shall be extended for an additional five (5) year term (the “ Renewal Term, ” and collectively with the Initial Term, the “ Term ”) upon prior written mutual agreement between the Company and the Executive of at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the Initial Term.

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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: affirmed. All the Justices concur, except Bell, P. J., Benham and Sears-Collins, JJ., who concur specially, and Weltner, C. J., who dissents as to Divisions 1, 3 and the judgment. 1 We do not foreclose the possibility that this court may interpret the equal protection clause in the Georgia Constitution to offer greater rights than the federal equal protection clause as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court. See, e.g., State v. Miller, 260 Ga. 669, 671 (398 SE2d 547) (1990) (finding 1983 Georgia Constitution provides broader protection than the First Amendment); Green v. State, 260 Ga. 625, 627 (398 SE2d 360) (1990) (finding State Constitution grants a broader right against self-incrimination than the U. S. Constitution); Fleming v. Zant, 259 Ga. 687, 690 (386 SE2d 339) (1989) (<HOLDING>). 2 The comments from the committee meetings on Options: A. holding that if a state case explicitly states that the state standard is more favorable to the defendant than the federal standard the federal claim is considered adjudicated below when the state standard is applied B. holding state constitutional guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment is more extensive than federal constitutional standard C. recognizing federal constitutional claim against the united states D. holding that the preponderance standard is generally constitutional E. recognizing defendants state and federal constitutional rights to testify

assistant: The best answer is B. holding state constitutional guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment is more extensive than federal constitutional standard
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: blizzard entertainment does not warrant that world of warcraft will be uninterrupted or error-free , or that world of warcraft or the service are free of viruses or other harmful components .

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: This Agreement and the obligations arising hereunder shall be governed by, and construed in accordance with, the laws of the state of Florida applicable to contracts made and performed in such state (without regard to principles of conflict of laws) and any applicable law of the United States of America, except that at all times the provisions for the creation, perfection and enforcement of the liens and security interests created pursuant hereto and pursuant to the other Loan Documents shall be governed by, and construed according to, the law of the State in which the properties are located, it being understood that, to the fullest extent permitted by the law of such state, the law of the State of Florida shall govern the construction, validity and enforceability of all Loan Documents and all of the obligations arising hereunder or thereunder. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Borrower hereby unconditionally and irrevocably waives any claim to assert that the law of any other jurisdiction governs this Agreement and the Notes, and this Agreement and the Notes shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida.

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

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: the exclusive jurisdiction and venue of any ip protection action or , if you timely provide academia.edu with an arbitration opt-out notice , any dispute other than an individual action brought in small claims court , will be the state and federal courts located in the northern district of california and each of the parties hereto waives any objection to jurisdiction and venue in such courts .

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: aliens. On the other hand, in recognition that a large segment of the shadow population played a useful and constructive role in the American economy, but continued to reside in perpetual fear, the Reform Act established two broad amnesty programs to allow existing undocumented aliens to emerge from the shadows. McNary v. Haitian Refugee Ctr., Inc., 498 U.S. 479, 481, 111 S.Ct. 888, 112 L.Ed.2d 1005 (1991) (footnotes omitted). 5 . However, whether or not the Defendants have violated the FLSA is a factual issue that is not appropriate for summary judgment. The Court takes the opportunity, though, to note that in light of its conclusion that the FLSA applies in the H-2B context, Aniaga and its progeny of H-2A cases become extremely persuasive precedent. See Arriaga, 305 F.3d at 1242 (<HOLDING>); see also De Luna-Guerrero v. N.C. Grower's Options: A. holding that bankruptcy court could not enter judgment for 7402564 under 107a for incurred costs when such costs had not been incurred B. holding that because plaintiffs failed to prove that their incurred fuel characterization and loading costs would not have been incurred in the nonbreach world plaintiffs were not entitled to recovery for these costs C. holding that cleanup costs incurred pursuant to a consent decree were not incurred voluntarily and must be sought through a 113f contribution action D. holding that copying costs are taxable if they are necessary to make copies of information required to be produced and not incurred just to make copies for the convenience of the producing party E. holding that travel and visa costs are incurred by guestworkers for the primary benefit and convenience of their employer and thus are not other facilities that can be counted as wage credits pursuant to 29 usc 203m

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that travel and visa costs are incurred by guestworkers for the primary benefit and convenience of their employer and thus are not other facilities that can be counted as wage credits pursuant to 29 usc 203m
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 term "Mortgagor" as used in this Deed of Trust will be construed as singular or plural to correspond with the number of Persons executing this Deed of Trust as Mortgagor. If more than one Person executes this Deed of Trust as Mortgagor, his, her, its, or their duties and liabilities under this Deed of Trust will be joint and several. The terms "Mortgagee", "Mortgagor", and "Trustee" as used in this Deed of Trust include the heirs, executors or administrators, successors, representatives, receiver, trustees and assigns of those parties. Unless the context otherwise requires, terms used in this Deed of Trust which are defined in the Uniform Commercial Code of Texas are used with the meanings therein defined.

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: to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law , in no event will tinder , its affiliates , employees , licensors or service providers be liable for any indirect , consequential , exemplary , incidental , special or punitive damages , including , without limitation , loss of profits , whether incurred directly or indirectly , or any loss of data , use , goodwill , or other intangible losses , resulting from : ( i ) your access to or use of or inability to access or use the services , ( ii ) the conduct or content of other users or third parties on , through , or following use of the services ; or ( iii ) unauthorized access , use or alteration of your content , even if tinder has been advised of the possibility of such damages .

assistant: Limitation of liability
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 may be executed in two or more counterparts (including via facsimile), each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. The section headings contained in this Agreement are for reference purposes only and shall not affect in any way the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: is construed broadly. Pennington, 261 F.3d at 1266. Although close temporal proximity can indicate causation, the temporal proximity must be “very close.” Clark County Sch. Dist. v. Breeden, 532 U.S. 268, 273, 121 S.Ct. 1508, 1511, 149 L.Ed.2d 509 (2001). This court has held that “in the absence of any other evidence of causation,” a three-month proximity is insufficient to establish causation. Drago v. Jenne, 453 F.3d 1301, 1308 (11th Cir.2006); see also Higdon v. Jackson, 393 F.3d 1211, 1220 (11th Cir.2004) (“If there is a substantial delay between the protected expression and the adverse action in the absence of other evidence tending to show causation, the complaint of retaliation fails as a matter of law.”); Wascura v. City of South Miami, 257 F.3d 1238, 1248 (11th Cir.2001) (<HOLDING>). After a thorough review, we conclude that Options: A. holding that three and onehalf months between the filing of an eeoc charge and the adverse employment action was insufficient by itself to establish causation B. holding a three and onehalf year delay was unreasonable C. holding that by itself three and onehalf months was insufficient to prove causation D. holding that a three and onehalf month temporal proximity is insufficient to create a jury issue on causation E. holding one and onehalf months establishes causation while three months is too long and does not

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that by itself three and onehalf months was insufficient to prove causation
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 Closing of the sale and purchase of the Units under this Agreement (the “ Closing ”) shall take place remotely at 10:00 a.m. on the date hereof by the exchange of documents and signatures, or at such other time or place as the Company and the Purchasers purchasing a majority of the Units to be sold at the Closing mutually agree (the date of the Closing is hereinafter referred to as the “ Closing Date ”).

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: did not take the right steps when removing ... and ... a removed matter must be remanded .if there are any defects in the removal procedure.”); Ortiz v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., 583 F.Supp. 526, 529 (N.D.Ill.1984) (“A defendant seeking removal must strictly comply with all the statutory requirements, and where there is doubt as to whether the 812, 815 (5th Cir.1993) (a foreign corporation filed a timely notice of removal within thirty days from the date it first discovered the re-movability of an action by reason of the fraudulent joinder of certain non-diverse co-defendants, though it filed the notice more than thirty days from the date the complaint was served); Deming v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., No. Civ. A. 3:03CV1225(CFD), 2004 WL 332741, at *5 (D.Conn. Feb. 14, 2004) (<HOLDING>); Simpson v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 282 F.Supp.2d Options: A. holding that were the court to find fraudulent joinder as to a nondiverse defendant on the basis of evidence equally dispositive of the liability of that defendant and a nondiverse defendant a refusal later in the proceedings to give judgment for the diverse defendant on the same grounds in turn would require the court to revisit a ruling that the nondiverse defendant was fraudulently joined B. holding that removal based on fraudulent joinder was not timely where it occurred more than thirty days after the removing defendants learned of facts showing that a nondiverse codefendant was fraudulently joined C. holding that removal was untimely where the removing defendant could have ascertained from the face of a complaint that certain nondiverse codefendants were fraudulently joined but did not seek removal based on fraudulent joinder until after the state court granted a motion to strike the plaintiffs allegations against the diversitydefeating codefendants D. holding that failure to remove within thirty days after receiving a statecourt complaint from which the removing defendant could have discerned fraudulent joinder of a nondiverse party rendered removal untimely E. holding that a party fraudulently joined to defeat removal need not join in removal petition

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that removal was untimely where the removing defendant could have ascertained from the face of a complaint that certain nondiverse codefendants were fraudulently joined but did not seek removal based on fraudulent joinder until after the state court granted a motion to strike the plaintiffs allegations against the diversitydefeating codefendants
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 submit a counter notification to the company in response to a notification of claimed infringement , then the company will promptly provide the person who provided the notification of claimed infringement with a copy of your counter notification and inform that person that the company will replace the removed user content or feedback or cease disabling access to it in 10 business days , and the company will replace the removed user content or feedback and cease disabling access to it not less than 10 , nor more than 14 , business days following receipt of the counter notification , unless the company 's designated agent receives notice from the party that submitted the notification of claimed infringement that such person has filed an action seeking a court order to restrain the user from engaging in infringing activity relating to the material on the company 's system or network .

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: did not precisely articulate their notarization argument on appeal, it was a central issue in the superior court. Because the Espelands are now proceeding pro se (they were represented by counsel in the superior court), we construe their general arguments to include the specific arguments presented to the superior court and address this issue. 29 . AS 44.50.062(5). 30 . The Espelands do not-cite to any law that would require such a disclosure. Conveyances of land, mortgages, and deeds of trust are dealt with extensively under AS 34.20.010-.160, and nowhere in these statutes is there such a disclosure requirement. 31 . The Espelands cite a Massachusetts case for the proposition that blank endorsements are invalid, US Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Ibanez, 458 Mass. 637, 941 N.E.2d 40, 53 (2011) (<HOLDING>), but this case is inappo-site as Alaska Options: A. holding that a tax appeal on real property is a lien on the real estate and not a personal obligation of the landowner B. holding that plaintiffs may have a property interest in real property C. holding that massachusetts provides an adequate remedy for challenging a real estate tax assessment D. holding blank transfers of real property are impermissible under massachusetts law E. holding that forfeiture of real property may be adjudicated before the seizure occurs because real property cannot abscond

assistant: The best answer is D. holding blank transfers of real property are impermissible under massachusetts 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: Each of the Lenders, each Issuing Bank and each of the Agents agrees that it shall maintain in confidence any information relating to Holdings, the Borrowers and any Subsidiary furnished to it by or on behalf of Holdings, the Borrowers or any Subsidiary (other than information that (a) has become generally available to the public other than as a result of a disclosure by such party, (b) has been independently developed by such Lender, such Issuing Bank or such Agent without violating this Section 9.16 or (c) was available to such Lender, such Issuing Bank or such Agent from a third party having, to such person’s knowledge, no obligations of confidentiality to Holdings, the Borrowers or any other Loan Party) and shall not reveal the same other than to its directors, trustees, officers, employees and advisors with a need to know or to any person that approves or administers the Loans on behalf of such Lender (so long as each such person shall have been instructed to keep the same confidential in accordance with this Section 9.16), except: (A) to the extent necessary to comply with law or any legal process or the requirements of any Governmental Authority, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners or of any securities exchange on which securities of the disclosing party or any Affiliate of the disclosing party are listed or traded, (B) as part of normal reporting or review procedures to, or examinations by, Governmental Authorities or self-regulatory authorities, including the National Association of Insurance Commissioners or the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., (C) to its parent companies, Affiliates or auditors (so long as each such person shall have been instructed to keep the same confidential in accordance with this Section 9.16), (D) in order to enforce its rights under any Loan Document in a legal proceeding, (E) to any pledge under Section 9.04(d) or any other prospective assignee of, or prospective Participant in, any of its rights under this Agreement (so long as such person shall have been instructed to keep the same confidential in accordance with this Section 9.16), (F) with the consent of the Company, (G) on a confidential basis to market data collectors, any rating agency or the CUSIP Bureau when required by it and (H) to any direct or indirect contractual counterparty in Swap Agreements or such contractual counterparty’s professional advisor (so long as such contractual counterparty or professional advisor to such contractual counterparty agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Section 9.16).

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: At the time any Award is made under this Article X, the Company and the Holder shall enter into a Restricted Stock Unit Agreement setting forth each of the matters contemplated thereby and such other matters as the Committee may determine to be appropriate. The Restricted Stock Unit Agreement shall set forth the individual service-based vesting requirement which the Holder would be required to satisfy before the Holder would become entitled to distribution pursuant to Section 10.3 and the number of Units awarded to the Holder. Such conditions shall be sufficient to constitute a “substantial risk of forfeiture” as such term is defined under Section 409A of the Code. At the time of such Award, the Committee may, in its sole discretion, prescribe additional terms and conditions or restrictions relating to Restricted Stock Unit Awards in the Restricted Stock Unit Agreement, including, but not limited to, rules pertaining to the effect of Termination of Service prior to expiration of the applicable vesting period. The terms and conditions of the respective Restricted Stock Unit Agreements need not be identical.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Schedule 4.3 sets forth as of the date hereof (a) the authorized capital stock of the Company; (b) the number of shares of capital stock issued and outstanding; (c) the number of shares of capital stock issuable pursuant to the Company’s stock plans; and (d) the number of shares of capital stock issuable and reserved for issuance pursuant to securities (other than the Shares) exercisable for, or convertible into or exchangeable for any shares of capital stock of the Company. All of the issued and outstanding shares of the Company’s capital stock have been duly authorized and validly issued and are fully paid, nonassessable and none of such shares were issued in violation of any pre-emptive rights and such shares were issued in compliance in all material respects with applicable Cayman Islands, state and federal securities law and any rights of third parties. Except as described on Schedule 4.3 or as described in the IPO Registration Statement and the Company’s filings pursuant to the 1934 Act (collectively, the “ SEC Filings ”), no Person is entitled to pre-emptive or similar statutory or contractual rights with respect to the issuance by the Company of any securities of the Company. Except as described on Schedule 4.3 or as described in the SEC filings, there are no outstanding warrants, options, convertible securities or other rights, agreements or arrangements of any character under which the Company is or may be obligated to issue any equity securities of any kind and except as contemplated by this Agreement. Except as described on Schedule 4.3 or as described in the SEC filings and except for the Registration Rights Agreement, there are no voting agreements, buy-sell agreements, option or right of first purchase agreements or other agreements of any kind among the Company and any of the securityholders of the Company relating to the securities of the Company held by them. Except as described on Schedule 4.3 or as described in the SEC filings and except as provided in the Registration Rights Agreement, no Person has the right to require the Company to register any securities of the Company under the 1933 Act, whether on a demand basis or in connection with the registration of securities of the Company for its own account or for the account of any other Person.

assistant: Capitalization
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 a Grantee becomes disabled (within the meaning of Code §22(e)(3)) prior to the expiration date fixed for his or her Option, and the Grantee’s Termination of Service occurs as a consequence of such disability, such Option may be exercised by the Grantee at any time prior to the earlier of (i) the expiration date specified in the Award Agreement, or (ii) six months after the date of such Termination of Service (unless the Award Agreement provides a different expiration date in the case of such a Termination). Such Option may be exercised to the extent of the number of shares with respect to which the Grantee could have exercised it on the date of such Termination of Service, or to any greater extent permitted by the Administrator, and shall terminate on the date of such Termination of Service with respect to the remaining shares. In the event of the Grantee’s legal disability, such Option may be exercised by the Grantee’s legal representative.

assistant: Disability
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: affidavits for search warrants indicated probable cause of ongoing criminal enterprises, of a wide variety. See generally 2 Wayne R. LaFave, Search & Seisure § 8."T(a), 344-46 nn. 17-26 (3d ed.1996) (illegal paramilitary operations, gambling operations, ongoing fraud or loansharking operations, ongoing processing or repeated sales of drugs, liquor, or guns, repeated thefts or receipt of stolen property). Especially with regard to illegal drugs, probable cause of ongoing sales and production has been expressly distinguished from probable cause of mere use. Compare Andresen, ("The observation of half-smoked marijuana cigarette in an ashtray at a cocktail party may well be stale the day after the cleaning lady has been in .. ..") with United States v. Hyde, 574 F.2d 856 (5th Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>) In light of the nature of the manufacturing or Options: A. holding probable cause and exigent circumstances justified warrantless search of automobile where officers received information from an informant that defendants would be traveling in a vehicle containing illegal drugs and due to the lateness of the hour it would have been impractical to get a search warrant B. holding that executing officers reasonably relied on judges determination that there was probable cause to search motel room for evidence of drug activity even though search warrant affidavit failed to mention a connection between motel room and criminal activity C. holding that in light of hj inc s special emphasis on the sheer duration of criminal activity we conclude that activity continuing as alleged here for a period of ten years must be considered to have extended over a substantial period of time hence to constitute long term conduct meeting the pattern requirement D. holding warrant valid where search warrant application affidavit was signed and probable cause existed for issuance of warrant E. holding in context of widespread and continuing conspiracy to smuggle drugs the upshot of this rule to practical application has been to allow fairly long periods of time to elapse between information and search warrant of criminal activity

assistant: The best answer is E. holding in context of widespread and continuing conspiracy to smuggle drugs the upshot of this rule to practical application has been to allow fairly long periods of time to elapse between information and search warrant of criminal activity
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: rovio retains all right , title and interest in and to the rovio services , including , but not limited to , all copyrights , trademarks , trade secrets , trade names , proprietary rights , patents , titles , computer codes , audiovisual effects , themes , characters , character names , stories , dialog , settings , artwork , sound effects , musical works , and moral rights whether registered or not and all applications thereof .

assistant: None