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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: Zillgitt was sentenced principally to 109 months’ imprisonment. In a separate appeal docketed as No. 00-1421, Zillgitt challenges the legality, of his sentence, arguing that the jury’s general verdict, made without findings as to the type and amount of drugs involved in the conspiracy,, required that he be sentenced under 21 U .S.C. § 841(b)(1)(D), which provides the penalties for conspiring to distribute an unspecified amount of marijuana. The maximum period of imprisonment for violation of that subsection is 5 years, which is substantially less than the sentence imposed on defendant, nearly 7 years of which he has already served. In his motion for bail pending appeal, Zillgitt argues that, both under our decision in United States v. Barnes, 158 F.3d 662, 667-72 (2d Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>), and under the principles recently articulated Options: A. holding that a defendant can only be sentenced for misprision of felony based on drug quantities that he knew or should have known or foreseen were involved in the conspiracy B. holding that evidence of prior drug transactions was admissible under rule 404b to show inter alia intent to enter into the drug conspiracy and knowledge of the conspiracy C. holding a fiveyear old drug conviction is probative of a defendants state of mind in a drug conspiracy case D. holding that when a district court determines drug quantity for the purpose of sentencing a defendant convicted of participating in a drugtrafficking conspiracy the court is required to make an individualized finding as to drug amounts attributable to or foreseeable by that defendant E. holding that in certain circumstances where a defendant is convicted of a charge alleging a conspiracy to distribute one drug or another he must be sentenced as if the conviction were only for a conspiracy involving the drug that triggers the lowest statutory sentencing range

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that in certain circumstances where a defendant is convicted of a charge alleging a conspiracy to distribute one drug or another he must be sentenced as if the conviction were only for a conspiracy involving the drug that triggers the lowest statutory sentencing range
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: No failure or delay on the part of the Administrative Agent, the Facility Agent, the Security Agent, any Co-Collateral Agent, any Issuing Lender or any Lender in exercising any right, power or privilege hereunder or under any other Credit Document and no course of dealing between any Obligor and the Administrative Agent, the Facility Agent, the Security Agent, any Co-Collateral Agent, any Issuing Lender or any Lender shall operate as a waiver thereof; nor shall any single or partial exercise of any right, power or privilege hereunder or under any other Credit Document preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right, power or privilege hereunder or thereunder. The rights, powers and remedies herein or in any other Credit Document expressly provided are cumulative and not exclusive of any rights, powers or remedies which the Administrative Agent, the Facility Agent, the Security Agent, any Co‑Collateral Agent, any Issuing Lender or any Lender would otherwise have. No notice to or demand on any Obligor in any case shall entitle any Obligor to any other or further notice or demand in similar or other circumstances or constitute a waiver of the rights of the Administrative Agent, the Facility Agent, the Security Agent, any Co-Collateral Agent, any Issuing Lender or any Lender to any other or further action in any circumstances without notice or demand.

assistant: No Waivers
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: failure to exhaust administrative remedies, making the claim unripe for review. See Rahman v. McElroy, 884 F.Supp. 782, 785 (S.D.N.Y.1995) (dismissing complaint of aliens simultaneously seeking adjustment and immigrant visas where the adjustment applications had not yet been adjudicated, and holding that “[f]ailure to seek ... administrative review before challenging an adjustment denial in a district court constitutes a failure to exhaust administrative remedies”); Yeung v. Reno, 868 F.Supp. 53, 57 .(S.D.N.Y.1994), aff'd, 57 F.3d 1062 (2d Cir.1995) (“This court has concluded that its direct review of an adjustment determination is precluded by the requirement of exhaustion of remedies.” (citations omitted)); Augoustinakis v. United States I.N.S., 693 F.Supp. 1554, 1556 (S.D.N.Y.1988) (<HOLDING>). As a general rule, subject matter Options: A. holding that a district court opinion which cites as controlling authority a decision that is either pending review in or has been reversed by this court continues to constitute prima facie express conflict and allows this court to exercise its jurisdiction B. holding that the relevant inquiry is not whether the court has discretion to facilitate notice but whether this is an appropriate case in which to exercise discretion C. holding that the supreme court will not issue advisory opinion on issue not before the court D. holding that because deportation proceedings may produce a different outcome any decision by this court regarding the appropriateness of the district directors refusal to exercise his discretion to adjust the plaintiffs status would constitute an advisory opinion which is prohibited citations omitted E. recognizing that an advisory opinion is one that offers an opinion on a moot issue

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that because deportation proceedings may produce a different outcome any decision by this court regarding the appropriateness of the district directors refusal to exercise his discretion to adjust the plaintiffs status would constitute an advisory opinion which is prohibited citations omitted
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: impersonate any person or entity or otherwise misrepresents affiliation , connection or association with any person or entity , or use any fraudulent , misleading or inaccurate contact information ;

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 following Terms of Service clause and list all applicable unfairness categories. If none apply, answer with None. Clause: airbnb may restrict the availability of the airbnb platform or certain areas or features thereof , if this is necessary in view of capacity limits , the security or integrity of our servers , or to carry out maintenance measures that ensure the proper or improved functioning of the airbnb platform .

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: FLIC agrees to indemnify Executive, to the fullest extent permitted under applicable law and as provided in FLIC’s Certificate of Incorporation, Bylaws and directors’ and officers’ liability insurance policy, against all expenses and liabilities reasonably incurred by Executive in connection with or arising out of any action, suit or proceeding which Executive may be involved by reason of having been an officer or employee of FLIC.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: based on her testimony. The opinion about the family life of a witness had no bearing on the outcome of the case, unlike in the present case, where the jurors’ opinions about Detective Smith’s testimony could suggest that they had formed an opinion about Dillard’s guilt and Detective Smith’s credibility. Once the parties raise the issue of juror-witness contact, and facts show that the jurors intentionally made contact with a key prosecution witness and that the contact may have been about the substance of his testimony, and that the jurors may have discussed and formed an opinion on the ultimate question of the defendant’s guilt or innocence, the trial judge must conduct a meaningful inquiry that will resolve the factual questions raised by the contact. The contact 46, 250 (1993) (<HOLDING>). In the present case, the trial judge could Options: A. holding that defendants have a right to be present at voir dire B. holding that the defendant must renew a motion for a change of venue after voir dire to preserve the issue for appeal C. holding that the jurors failure to remember particular facts inquired about on voir dire and the jurors misunderstanding of voir dire questions do not constitute probable prejudice D. holding that trial courts denial of motion for new trial based on juror misconduct was justified where there was no evidence presented at hearing on motion that juror had knowingly concealed relevant litigation experience during voir dire and identity of juror as county court litigant was not demonstrated E. holding that the court has a duty to resolve the issue of prejudice arising out of jury misconduct even though the defense could have requested a voir dire examination of the juror in its motion to disqualify

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the court has a duty to resolve the issue of prejudice arising out of jury misconduct even though the defense could have requested a voir dire examination of the juror in its motion to disqualify
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, demands, and other communications (collectively, “Notices”) hereunder shall be in writing and delivered to the parties hereto by (a) hand-delivery, (b) established express delivery service that maintains delivery records, (c) certified or registered U.S. mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or (d) facsimile or other electronic means with confirmation of delivery and follow up delivery by a method set forth in subsections (a) – (c) at the following addresses, or at such other address as the parties hereto may designate pursuant to this Section 10.1.

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

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: In the event of a Change in Control and the loss of your Directorship, the restrictions applicable to any shares of Stock covered by this Award shall lapse, and such shares of Stock shall become free of all restrictions and become fully vested and transferable.

assistant: Change In Control
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: Comply in all material respects with the requirements of all Laws and all orders, writs, injunctions and decrees of any Governmental Authority applicable to it or to its business or property, except if the failure to comply therewith would not reasonably be expected to have a Material Adverse Effect.

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

user: Read the case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: have somehow defamed him, and that this defamation combined with the removal of his administrative powers constituted a deprivation of a liberty interest without due process of law. This claim suffers from two fatal flaws. First, plaintiff has failed to point to any defamatory comments by defendants or to even allege that the actions of defendants were somehow based on a belief by defendants that plaintiff is guilty of some type of wrongdoing. While plaintiff has alleged that the' removal of his powers caused him “to suffer ... loss of reputation in the community and great emotional and mental distress and embarrassment,” the mere removal of his powers without any negative comments by defendants does not rise to the level of defamation. See Roth, 408 U.S. at 573-74, 92 S.Ct. at 2707-08 (<HOLDING>). And second, defamation alone is insufficient Options: A. holding that defamation standing alone is not sufficient to establish a claim for deprivation of a liberty interest citations omitted B. holding that merely declining to rehire a person did not constitute defamation for deprivation of liberty interest purposes absent any charges against the good name or reputation of that person C. holding doma was unconstitutional as a deprivation of liberty of the person protected by the fifth amendment D. holding that members of the city council in their official capacity are not immune from a section 1983 suit against the municipality for deprivation of liberty interest in reputation without due process E. holding that police officers have a qualified privilege against defamation claims for reporting the fact that a person was arrested and the charges for which the person is being held

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that merely declining to rehire a person did not constitute defamation for deprivation of liberty interest purposes absent any charges against the good name or reputation of that person
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: constructive fraud under 11 U.S.C. §§ 548(a)(1)(A) and (B); breach of the Operating Agreement by wrongfully dissociating from Federalpha and by violating the Operating Agreement’s non-competition clause; and breach of its fiduciary duties under the Illinois LLC Act. See Federalpha Steel LLC Creditors’ Trust, 368 B.R. at 696. Although PHA Steel contends that the allegations in these claims are not related to the indemnification provision of the Withdrawal Agreement in which Federal Pipe brings its third-party complaint, I conclude that they are. The interpretation of paragraph 14 of the Withdrawal Agreement, on which Federal Pipe brings a contractual indemnification claim, is a question of law. See Automation By Design, Inc. v. Raybestos Prods. Co., 463 F.3d 749, 753 (7th Cir.2006) (<HOLDING>). With certain qualifications, paragraph 14 of Options: A. holding that when a contract is unambiguous the court will enforce the plain meaning of the contract as the intention of the parties B. holding erisa plan interpretation is simply one of contract interpretation C. holding that interpretation of contract documents regulations or a solicitation present no disputed issues of material fact and is a question of law D. holding that where the language of the contract is unambiguous and conveys a definite meaning the court may decide the meaning of the contract as a matter of law E. holding that the interpretation of an unambiguous contract is a question of law

assistant: The best answer is E. holding that the interpretation of an unambiguous contract is a question of 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 case excerpt and choose the best holding from the options. Case excerpt: 1 (referring to AHUG as “plaintiff” suing “on behalf of its members”; the members were not named as “plaintiffs”).) 14 USCIT R. 10(a) states that “ [e]very pleading must have a caption with the court’s name, a title[,] a court number, and a Rule 7(a) designation. The caption of the summons and the complaint must name all the parties; the title of other pleadings, after naming the first party on each side, may refer generally to other parties.” USCIT Rule 10 corresponds to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 10. Congressional intent behind Rule 10, which discounts claims where the complaint fails to sufficiently identify a party, is rooted in concern for providing notice to the parties in an action and protecting the public interest. See Doe v. Rostker, 89 F.R.D. 158, 160 (N.D. Cal. 1981)(<HOLDING>). Although AHUG claims that three utility Options: A. holding that to determine whether a statement was voluntary the court must consider the totality of all the surrounding circumstances both the characteristics of the accused and the details of the interrogation and decide whether a defendants will was overborne by the circumstances surrounding the giving of a confession B. recognizing that the intent element is to be gleaned from all the surrounding facts and testimony and not solely from the subjective intent of the original shipper C. holding that a motion to intervene to assert the publics first amendment right of access to criminal proceedings is proper D. holding the purpose behind fed r civ p 10 is not solely one of administrative convenience but serves to apprise the parties of their opponents and it protects the publics legitimate interest in knowing all the facts and events surrounding court proceedings E. holding that where the proffered hearsay statement of the victim pertained to a memory of the previous days events and was offered solely for the purpose of proving such events such statement was not admissible under rule 8033

assistant: The best answer is D. holding the purpose behind fed r civ p 10 is not solely one of administrative convenience but serves to apprise the parties of their opponents and it protects the publics legitimate interest in knowing all the facts and events surrounding court proceedings
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 reasonable and provides a basis for relying on the VE or [vocational specialist] testimony rather than on the DOT information”). The ALJ did not identify what aspect of the VE’s experience warranted deviation from the DOT, and did not point to any evidence in the record other than the VE’s sparse testimony for the deviation. Therefore, the ALJ’s step four finding was erroneous. Although the ALJ’s step four determination constitutes error, it is harmless error in light of the ALJ’s alternative finding at step five. At step five, the ALJ concluded that, assuming Tommasetti could not perform past work, he could still perform other work in the national and local economies that existed in significant numbers. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(a)(4)(v), 404.1560(c); Robbins, 466 F.3d at 885 (<HOLDING>). The ALJ, relying on the VE’s testimony, found Options: A. holding that error that is inconsequential to the ultimate nondisability determination is harmless error B. recognizing that where the error involved defies analysis by harmless error standards or the data is insufficient to conduct a meaningful harmless error analysis then the error will not be proven harmless beyond a reasonable doubt C. holding that any error was harmless and thus not plain error D. holding exclusion was harmless error E. holding that in order to conclude that federal constitutional error is harmless court must find that error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that error that is inconsequential to the ultimate nondisability determination is harmless 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: not, in itself, confer a liberty interest in a full-time education. Giano, supra, at *3. Prison officials need not provide an educational program tailored to the specific needs and circumstances of the inmate. Gi-ano, supra, at *3 (“neither § 136 nor DOCS policies require a prison to provide an inmate with specialized educational programs”); Clarkson v. Coughlin, 898 F.Supp. 1019, 1041 (S.D.N.Y.1995) (“only the provision of no ed ucation at all or education that was wholly unsuited to the goals of a particular inmate’s socialization and rehabilitation trigger due process protections” under § 136); Jones v. Grunewarld, 644 F.Supp. 256, 259 (S.D.N.Y. 1986) (§ 136 does not provide an inmate a protected property interest in a' scholarship); Lane v. Reid, 575 F.Supp. 37, 39 (S.D.N.Y. 1983) (<HOLDING>). Federal courts have, moreover, consistently Options: A. holding that 136 does not provide inmate a protected property interest in full time program of education B. holding that prisoner had no liberty interest in remaining in voluntary boot camp program despite fact that completion of program qualifies inmate for early release C. holding that a professionals license is a protected property interest D. holding that any constitutionally protected property interest an employee has as a result of his employment contract is satisfied by payment of the full compensation due under the contract E. holding that sovereign immunity does not protect the state from claims for statutory employment benefits that constitute a protected property interest

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that 136 does not provide inmate a protected property interest in full time program of education
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: Should one or more provisions of this Agreement be or become invalid, then the parties hereto will attempt to agree upon valid provisions in substitution for the invalid provisions, which in their economic effect come so close to the invalid provisions that it can be reasonably assumed that the parties would have accepted this Agreement with those new provisions. If the parties are unable to agree on such valid provisions, the invalidity of such one or more provisions of this Agreement will not affect the validity of the Agreement as a whole, unless the invalid provisions are of such essential importance for this Agreement that it may be reasonably presumed that the parties would not have entered into this Agreement without the invalid provisions.

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: The Borrower will not, and will not permit any of its Restricted Subsidiaries to amend, modify, waive or otherwise change, consent or agree to any amendment, modification, waiver or other change to any Specified Indebtedness if doing so would (i) increase the rate of interest thereon or (ii) (A) cause such Specified Indebtedness to not meet the requirements set forth in the definition of Permitted Refinancing Indebtedness or Permitted Unsecured Indebtedness, as applicable (tested as if such Specified Indebtedness were being issued or incurred at such time) and (B) with respect to any other Specified Indebtedness, shorten the average maturity or average life of such Specified Indebtedness; provided that the foregoing shall not prohibit the execution of supplemental indentures to add guarantors if required provided such Person complies with Section 8.14(d) ; provided , further , that the foregoing shall not prohibit the execution of supplemental indentures to effectuate the proposed amendments to the 2025 Senior Notes Indenture as the same are set forth in and in accordance with the terms and subject to the conditions of the Williston Sale Consent Solicitation.

assistant: Amendments
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: conclude that Southern Natural’s candid admission that it dredged the pipeline in question is new evidence that was not available to Plaintiffs at the time of the summary judgment motion. Finally, Southern Natural will not be unfairly prejudiced by the district court’s consideration of Southern Natural’s own admissions and deposition testimony. This is not situation in which Southern Natural was unaware that the evidence at issue existed — the contents of both the deposition testimony and admissions were always known to Southern Natural and within its control. Further, had the district court utilized the case management order, this evidence would have been properly in front of the district court before it granted summary judgment in Southern Natural’s favor. See Luig, 817 F.3d at 907 (<HOLDING>). There are “two important judicial Options: A. holding that there was no prejudice when evidence complained of would have been admissible against defendant in separate trial B. holding that there was no prejudice where had the district court allowed the moving party the proper opportunity to respond the evidence would have been properly in front of the district court C. holding that unpleaded affirmative defense was properly considered by the district court where plaintiff had notice of the defense and an opportunity to respond D. holding that district courts dismissal of state law claims was proper where the district court had properly dismissed all of the federal questions that gave it original jurisdiction E. holding that the district court had discretion where plaintiff sought to amend a count that had been dismissed with prejudice

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that there was no prejudice where had the district court allowed the moving party the proper opportunity to respond the evidence would have been properly in front of the district court
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: similar argument and holding that “[t]he Batson rule does not ... apply to eases where the state uses its peremptory strikes to remove potential jurors not excludable for cause who have expressed reservations about capital punishment”); accord, e.g., People v. Davis, 794 P.2d 159, 208-09 (Colo.1990) (en banc) (stating that “[w]e agree that it is not inappropriate for a prosecutor to use his [or her] peremptory challenges to exclude jurors who, although they have indicated they can follow the law, have expressed reservations about their ability faithfully to do so or who have indicated that they disagree with the judgment of the people acting through their legislature that certain crimes are deserving of the ultimate penalty”); State v. Brogden, 329 N.C. 534, 407 S.E.2d 158, 166 (1991) (<HOLDING>); State v. Bell, 305 S.C. 11, 406 S.E.2d 165, Options: A. holding that trial court did not err B. holding that a defendants exercise of peremptory challenges is not denied or impaired when the defendant chooses to use a peremptory challenge to remove a juror who should have been excused for cause C. holding that the trial court did not err under either the federal or north carolina constitutions by allowing the state to exercise peremptory challenges to remove potential jurors based on their qualms regarding capital punishment D. holding that the trial court did not err by allowing the prosecution to question prospective jurors regarding their ability to announce a death sentence in an appropriate case E. holding that a foreign subsidiary that is not registered to do business in north carolina has no place of business employees or bank accounts in north carolina does not design manufacture or advertise its products in north carolina and does not solicit business in north carolina cannot be subject to personal jurisdiction in north carolina even if some of the companys products do enter north carolina through the stream of commerce

assistant: The best answer is C. holding that the trial court did not err under either the federal or north carolina constitutions by allowing the state to exercise peremptory challenges to remove potential jurors based on their qualms regarding capital punishment
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 Borrower will, and will cause each of the Subsidiaries to, do or cause to be done all things necessary to preserve, renew and keep in full force and effect their legal existence and the rights, licenses, permits, privileges and franchises material to the conduct of its business; provided that this Section 5.03 shall not require the Borrower or any Subsidiary to preserve or maintain any rights, licenses, permits, privileges or franchises if the Borrower shall reasonably determine that the failure to maintain and preserve the same by any Subsidiary would not reasonably be expected, in the aggregate, to have a Material Adverse Effect.

assistant: Existence
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 Borrower has the right and power, and has taken all necessary action to authorize it, to execute and deliver this Amendment and to perform its obligations hereunder and under the Credit Agreement, as amended by this Amendment, in accordance with their respective terms. This Amendment has been duly executed and delivered by a duly authorized officer of the Borrower and each of this Amendment and the Credit Agreement, as amended by this Amendment, is a legal, valid and binding obligation of the Borrower enforceable against the Borrower in accordance with its respective terms except as the same may be limited by bankruptcy, insolvency, and other similar laws affecting the rights of creditors generally and the availability of equitable remedies for the enforcement of certain obligations contained herein or therein and as may be limited by equitable principles generally.

assistant: Authorizations
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: most favorable to the nonmoving party, demonstrates that no genuine issue of material fact exists and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Id. at 1195; Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c). In a denaturalization proceeding, the government has a heavy burden of proof and must provide “clear, unequivocal, and convincing” evidence to justify the revocation. Schneiderman v. United States, 320 U.S. 118, 125, 63 S.Ct. 1333, 87 L.Ed. 1796 (1943) (internal quotations omitted). A revocation is justified if naturalization was illegally procured. Fedorenko v. United States, 449 U.S. 490, 506, 101 S.Ct. 737, 66 L.Ed.2d 686 (1981). Naturalization was illegally procured if an individual entered the country and obtained residence without a valid immigration visa. Id. at 518, 101 S.Ct. 737 (<HOLDING>). After World War II, the United States Options: A. holding that alien on student visa could not lawfully possess intent to be domiciled in the united states B. holding moot appeal from revocation of visa petition where immigrant subsequently obtained lpr status C. recognizing that an alien is ineligible for relief under 212c if he was not actually admissible at the time he received an adjustment of status D. holding that where an alien was ineligible for a visa as a matter of law his citizenship was illegally procured and subject to revocation E. holding ineligible for adjustment of status alien who was inadmissible due to reentry after prior removal

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that where an alien was ineligible for a visa as a matter of law his citizenship was illegally procured and subject to revocation
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: We reject that argument for two reasons. First, Mangum fails to adequately develop it. See Ariz. R.Crim. P. 31.13(c)(1)(vi), 17 A.R.S. Second, the one case Mangum cites, State v. Ault, 150 Ariz. 459, 724 P.2d 545 (1986), is inapposite, and pertinent Arizona case law refutes his position. See State v. Casey, 205 Ariz. 359, ¶ 11, 71 P.3d 351, 354 (2003) ("The federal and state due process clauses contain nearly identical language and protect the same interests.”); State v. Kaiser, 204 Ariz. 514, n. 2, 65 P.3d 463, 465 n. 2 (App.2003). 2 . This case does not involve a defendant who attempted to collaterally attack the validity of a prior conviction alleged for sentence enhancement or other purposes. See State ex rel. Collins v. Superior Court, 157 Ariz. 71, 75, 754 P.2d 1346, 1350 (1988) (<HOLDING>); cf. United States v. Herrell, 588 F.2d 711, Options: A. holding that the burden is on the defendant when the validity of the warrant is challenged B. holding that where the record shows defendant was represented by counsel and the conviction is valid on its face the defendant is precluded from attempting to undermine the validity of that conviction by collateral attack C. holding that being deported after a conviction for an aggravated felony is all that is required and it is irrelevant whether the conviction is valid at the time of sentencing D. holding the petitioners challenge of his conviction is not rendered moot by the expiration of the underlying sentence because collateral consequences flowing from the conviction give the petitioner a substantial stake in the judgment of conviction which survives the satisfaction of the sentence imposed on him E. holding that defendants have a federal constitutional right to make a collateral attack on a prior conviction only when that conviction was obtained without the assistance of counsel

assistant: The best answer is B. holding that where the record shows defendant was represented by counsel and the conviction is valid on its face the defendant is precluded from attempting to undermine the validity of that conviction by collateral attack
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: from the federal government were moot because the funding had already been disbursed to other grant applicants). B. Recovery from Grenada or Freshfields Ex-Im Bank further disputes the mootness of the Grynberg Funds issue on the theory that “an order of this Court to the effect that the Grynberg Funds belong to Ex-Im Bank would then require Grenada to return those funds forthwith to Ex-Im Bank.” Appellant’s Br. 25 n. 12. This contention ignores that, under the FSIA, the Grynberg Funds were arguably subject to attachment only after they were deposited with the District Court and— according to Ex-Im Bank, at least — “designat[ed]” for commercial use in the United States: namely, payment to Fresh-fields. See EM Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina, 473 F.3d 463, 484 (2d Cir.2007) (“EM I”) (<HOLDING>). The withdrawal of the funds from deposit with Options: A. holding that although miranda warnings were not given to defendant police officers they had no cause of action under 42 usc 1983 because they were never prosecuted B. holding student activity fees not to be state funds when they were segregated from university funds and the state treasury C. holding that the district court erred in finding that defendant intended to inflict a 1700000 loss in a case where the loans were applied for with fraudulent information but never issued because discovery of the fraud occurred before the funds were released D. holding that funds were unavailable for attachment under section 1610 because they were never used for or designated for use in commercial activity E. holding that defendants who were responsible for collision resulting in pollution of river were liable to commercial fishermen

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that funds were unavailable for attachment under section 1610 because they were never used for or designated for use in commercial 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: ( 7 ) harass , threaten , stalk , embarrass or cause distress , unwanted attention or discomfort to any user of world of warcraft or to blizzard entertainment representatives ;

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: If a Party or any third party to whom such Party has provided Confidential Information becomes legally compelled (by oral question, deposition, interrogatory, request for documents, subpoena, civil investigative demand or similar process or by rule, regulation or other applicable law) to disclose any Confidential Information, such Party shall promptly notify the other Party of such requirement before any disclosure is made so that the other Party may seek a protective order or other appropriate remedy or may waive compliance with the terms of this Agreement.

assistant: Yes
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 Executive agrees that, after the end of his employment, he will refrain from making, in writing or orally, any unfavorable comments about the Company, its operations, policies, or procedures that would be likely to injure the Company’s reputation or business prospects; provided , however , that nothing herein shall preclude the Executive from responding truthfully to a lawful subpoena or other compulsory legal process or from providing truthful information otherwise required by law.

assistant: Non-Disparagement
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: CURIAM. Affirmed. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); Christopher v. State, 489 So.2d 22 (Fla.1986)(<HOLDING>); Duncan v. State, 728 So.2d 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA Options: A. holding that defendants 3850 motion for postconviction relief was procedurally barred as successive where the defendants current rule 3850 motion is one that could have or should have been raised in his first rule 3850 motion B. holding as procedurally barred an initial postconviction claim alleging juror misconduct C. holding that the defendants habeas claim was procedurally barred because it could have been or was raised in his postconviction motion D. holding that successive motions for postconviction relief are procedurally barred E. holding that a claim is proeedurally barred where it was not raised in the defendants motion for postconviction relief

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that successive motions for postconviction relief are procedurally barred
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: Human Rights Law, N.Y. City Admin. Code § § 8-101 to -181. In ordering dismissal, the district court adopted the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Ronald L. Ellis, to which Sepe filed no objections. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the facts and the record of prior proceedings, which we reference only as necessary to explain our decision to affirm. Failure to object to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation within the prescribed time limit “may operate as a waiver of any further judicial review of the decision, as long as the parties receive clear notice of the consequences of their failure to object.” United States v. Male Juvenile (95-CR-1074), 121 F.3d 34, 38 (2d Cir.1997); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 155, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985) (<HOLDING>). This rule applies to both pro se and Options: A. holding rule 38 applies to frivolous criminal appeals as well as civil appeals B. holding that the court of appeals may not overrule modify or withdraw language from a previously published decision of the court of appeals C. holding the court of appeals had subject matter jurisdiction notwithstanding a defendants waiver of appellate rights in a plea agreement D. holding that court of appeals may adopt such waiver rule E. holding superior court civil rule 101a1 a nullity for the superior court may not adopt a rule which abridges any substantive right

assistant: The best answer is D. holding that court of appeals may adopt such waiver rule
system: You are a legal assistant. Answer concisely and accurately. When legal text is provided, rely on it and do not invent facts.

user: Read the legal provision and list the applicable contract clause categories. Provision: Each party represents, warrants and covenants that, to the best of its knowledge, neither Landlord nor Tenant is in default of any of its respective obligations under the Existing Lease and no event has occurred that, with the passage of time or the giving of notice (or both) would constitute a default by either Landlord or Tenant thereunder.

assistant: No Defaults
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 debtor and for the description of the collateral, which identifies EAI of NC as the debtor and put[s] third parties on inquiry notice to read the attached Security Agreement.” Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in the bankruptcy court, 4-5. {¶ 16} Plaintiff further contended that “[i]n this case, any third party inquiring as to liens against the EAI entity intended would be ‘fairly put on notice that there might be an outstanding lien’ against EAI of NC as a result of the Financing Statements listing EAI as the debtor and referring to the attached Security Agreement for the signature of the debtor and the description of the collateral, clearly setting forth EAI of NC as the debtor.” (Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in bankruptcy 96), 194 B.R. 23, 29 UCC Rep.Serv.2d 617 (<HOLDING>); and In re Platt (E.D.Pa.1966), 257 F.Supp. Options: A. holding a financing statement which incorrectly listed mines company inc as opposed to mines tire company inc to be sufficient B. holding statement of points in notice of appeal sufficient C. holding a company which is responsible for tendering into the market a drug which it knows or should know is so dangerous that it should not be taken by anyone can be said to have violated its duty of care either in design or marketing D. holding that where the appellants listed challenges in the statement of issues but failed to brief them the challenges were waived E. holding an issue listed in statement of issues on appeal but not addressed in brief is abandoned

assistant: The best answer is A. holding a financing statement which incorrectly listed mines company inc as opposed to mines tire company inc to be sufficient
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: to the section 924(c) jury instruction, we review it for plain error. See, e.g., United States v. Webster, 84 F.3d 1056, 1066 (8th Cir.1996). Although the pre-Bailey instruction was given to the jury (because Bailey had no rovide a defendant, upon their motion, any statement or report made by a government witness that relates to the subject matter of the direct testimony of that witness. 18 U.S.C. § 3500. The government need not provide the statement, however, until after the witness testifies on direct examination. 18 U.S.C. § 3500(a). 6 . The district court’s ruling was essentially a discovery matter, which we review for an abuse of discretion. See, e.g., United States v. Byrne, 83 F.3d 984, 990 (8th Cir.1996); see also United States v. Phillips, 854 F.2d 273, 278 (7th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>). But see United States v. Monroe, 943 F.2d Options: A. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the fbi informants file contained no brady material not already provided to the defendant in a summary B. holding that the alleged brady material was merely cumulative to the significant impeachment that already occurred during trial so there was no prejudice for a brady violation C. holding that an fbi agents rough notes of an interview of the defendant were not brady material because there was no independent showing that they contained evidence that was material to the defendants guilt or innocence D. holding a trial court did not abuse its discretion by failing to require disclosure of an informants name E. holding the district court did not abuse its discretion by applying local rules that excluded some of the material facts offered in opposition to a motion for summary judgment

assistant: The best answer is A. holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that the fbi informants file contained no brady material not already provided to the defendant in a summary