36 C.F.R. § 5.3
Business operations
Engaging in or soliciting any business in park areas, except in accordance with the provisions of a permit, contract, or other written agreement with the United States, except as such may be specifically authorized under special regulations applicable to a park area, is prohibited.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1972–2025 · leading case: United States v. Baca, 610 F. Supp. 2d 1203 (E.D. Cal. 2009).
United States v. Baca, 610 F. Supp. 2d 1203 (E.D. Cal. 2009). “INTRODUCTION Lorenzo Baca (“Appellant” or “Baca”) appeals his convictions following a bench trial by a magistrate judge for (1) engaging in a business in a national park in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 5.3 ; and (2) for traversing a cultural resource in violation of 36 C.”
Daniel Lesoeur v. United States, 21 F.3d 965 (9th Cir. 1994). “The regulation that governs business operations within all of the national parks, 36 C.F.R. § 5.3 , states that “[e]ngaging in or soliciting any business in park areas, except in accordance with the provisions of a permit, contract, or other written agreement with the United…”
United States v. Carter, 339 F. Supp. 1394 (D. Ariz. 1972). “This is an action by the United States of America for injunctive relief prohibiting the defendant Carter from engaging in or soliciting business within Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 5.3 . By stipulation of counsel the matter has been submitted…”
United States v. Thomas Duffy, 479 F.2d 1038 (2d Cir. 1973). “PER CURIAM: This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York affirming a judgment of the Magistrate’s Court for that district which found the appellant guilty of engaging in a business without a permit at the Fire Island…”
United States v. Silberman, 464 F. Supp. 866 (M.D. Fla. 1979). “He was charged with violating 36 C.F.R. § 5.3 , 1 as incorporated in 16 U.”
Marcavage v. Nat'l Park Serv., 666 F.3d 856 (3rd Cir. 2012). “See 36 C.F.R. § 5.3 . Marcavage contends these differences are immaterial.”
United States v. Knauer, 635 F. Supp. 2d 203 (E.D.N.Y 2009). “See 36 C.F.R. § 5.3 . 6 The Second Circuit’s reasoning in United States v.”
Gordon Price v. Merrick Garland, 45 F.4th 1059 (D.C. Cir. 2022). “” 36 C.F.R. § 5.3 . Similarly, a concessionaire must contract with the Government and pay a “franchise fee.”
Free Enter. Canoe Renters Ass'n v. Watt, 711 F.2d 852 (8th Cir. 1983). “In 1975, the Service charged Irby Williams, the founder of the Association, with violating 36 C.F.R. § 5.3 (1982). 6 The Park Service alleged that in retrieving rented canoes from a sand bar next to a public road running through the ONSR, Williams had engaged in business…”
Summer's Best Two Weeks v. Dep't of Conservation & Nat. Resources of the Commonwealth, 954 A.2d 94 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2008). “1972), a controversy with similar facts, the court upheld the Secretary of the Interior's interpretation and application of regulation 36 C.F.R. § 5.3 which prohibited anyone from "engaging in or soliciting any business in park areas, except in accordance with provisions of a…”
MARCAVAGE v. Nat'l Park Serv., 777 F. Supp. 2d 858 (E.D. Pa. 2011). “36 C.F.R. § 5.3 ; see also Society Hill Carriage Co.”
Alaska Wildlife All. v. Jensen, 108 F.3d 1065 (9th Cir. 1997). “In explaining why commercial fishing fails to “conform,” the proposed regulations cite a regulatory ban on commercial activities, 36 C.F.R. § 5.3 , and a 1978 internal management policy.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.