U.S. Code » Title 15 » Chapter CHAPTER 53— TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— CONTROL OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES

15 U.S.C. § 4

DEFINITIONS.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar
“In this Act:“(1) The term ‘asbestos’ means—“(A) chrysotile, amosite, or crocidolite, or“(B) in fibrous form, tremolite, anthophyllite, or actinolite.“(2) The term ‘asbestos-containing material’ means any material containing more than one percent asbestos by weight.“(3) The term ‘identifying characteristics’ means a description of asbestos or asbestos-containing material, including—“(A) the mineral or chemical constituents (or both) of the asbestos or material by weight or volume (or both),“(B) the types or classes of the product in which the asbestos or material is contained,“(C) the designs, patterns, or textures of the product in which the asbestos or material is contained, and“(D) the means by which the product in which the asbestos or material is contained may be distinguishable from other products containing asbestos or asbestos-containing material.“(4) The term ‘miscellaneous material’ means building material on structural components, structural members, or fixtures, such as floor and ceiling tiles. The term does not include surfacing material or thermal system insulation.“(5) The term ‘protocol’ means any procedure for taking, handling, and preserving samples of asbestos and asbestos-containing material and for testing and analyzing such samples for the purpose of determining the person who manufactured or processed for sale such samples and the identifying characteristics of such samples.“(6) The term ‘surfacing material’ means material in a building that is sprayed on surfaces, troweled on surfaces, or otherwise applied to surfaces for acoustical, fireproofing, or other purposes, such as acoustical plaster on ceilings and fireproofing material on structural members.“(7) The term ‘thermal system insulation’ means material in a building applied to pipes, fittings, boilers, breeching, tanks, ducts, or other structural components to prevent heat loss or gain or water condensation, or for other purposes.”
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 359 cases (24 in the last 5 years), 1928–2026 · leading case: Solaia Tech., LLC v. Specialty Publ'g Co., 852 N.E.2d 825 (Ill. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Solaia Tech., LLC v. Specialty Publ'g Co., 852 N.E.2d 825 (Ill. 2006). · cites it 2× “In fact, enforcement of section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act is left to the United States Attorney (see 15 U.S.C. § 4 (2000)), and there is no indication in the record that such proceedings against the plaintiffs were ever contemplated.”
George Hengle v. Sherry Treppa, 19 F.4th 324 (4th Cir. 2021). · cites it 3× “Like Section 1964(a), the introductory clause of Section 4 of the Sherman Act (currently codified at 15 U.S.C. § 4 ) grants district courts authority to “prevent and restrain” violations of the Act.”
Empagran S.A. v. F. Hoffman-LaRoche, Ltd., 315 F.3d 338 (D.C. Cir. 2003). · cites it 3× “by the federal government to enforce or prevent a substantive violation of the Sherman Act pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 4”; hence, the words “gives rise to a claim” mean that the conduct’s domestic effect “only must violate the substantive provisions of the Sherman Act.”
SEDIMA, S.P.R.L., Appellant, v. IMREX Co., INC., Gidon Armon & Jacob Armon, Appellees, 741 F.2d 482 (2d Cir. 1984). · cites it 3× “Section 4 provides as follows: [quoting 15 U.S.C. § 4 ]. House Hearings, supra note 9, at 543-44.”
United States v. Procter & Gamble Co., 356 U.S. 677 (1958). · cites it 2× “209 , as amended, 15 U. S. C. § 4 , to enjoin alleged violations of § 1 and § 2 of the Act.”
Cascade Nat. Gas Corp. v. El Paso Nat. Gas Co., 386 U.S. 129 (1967). · cites it 3× “" 15 U. S. C. §§ 4 and 25. That statutory command is violated when private parties are allowed to intervene and control public suits.”
United States v. Philadelphia Nat'l Bank, 374 U.S. 321 (1963). · cites it 2× “The United States, appellant here, brought this civil action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania under § 4 of the Sherman Act, 15 U. S. C. § 4 , and § 15 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.”
Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe Mach. Corp., 392 U.S. 481 (1968). · cites it 2× “209 , 15 U. S. C. § 4 . United Shoe Machinery Corp.”
Times-Picayune Publ'g Co. v. United States, 345 U.S. 594 (1953). · cites it 2× “" 15 U. S. C. § 4 . The complaint named as defendants the Times-Picayune Publishing Company and four of its officers.”
United States v. Topco Assocs., Inc., 405 U.S. 596 (1972). · cites it 2× “Jurisdiction was grounded in § 4 of the Act, 15 U. S. C. § 4 . Following a trial on the merits, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois entered judgment for Topco, 319 F.”
California v. Am. Stores Co., 495 U.S. 271 (1990). · cites it 2× “" 15 U. S. C. § 26 . [7] That the two provisions do differ is not surprising at all, since § 15 was largely copied from § 4 of the Sherman Act, see 26 Stat.”
Far East Conf. v. United States, 342 U.S. 570 (1952). · cites it 2× “209 , 15 U. S. C. § 4 . [2] Section 3 of the Shipping Act of 1916 created the Shipping Board.”
Show all 359 citing cases →
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.