41 U.S.C. § 1707
Publication of proposed regulations
Historical and Revision Notes | ||
|---|---|---|
Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
1707 | 41:418b. | Pub. L. 93–400, § 22, as added Pub. L. 98–577, title III, § 302(a), Oct. 30, 1984, 98 Stat. 3076; Pub. L. 103–355, title V, § 5092, Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3362, as amended Pub. L. 104–106, title XLIII, § 4321(a)(9), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 671. |
In subsection (a)(2), the words “Notwithstanding the preceding sentence” are omitted as unnecessary.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2020–2023 · leading case: State of Louisiana v. Biden, 55 F.4th 1017 (5th Cir. 2022).
State of Louisiana v. Biden, 55 F.4th 1017 (5th Cir. 2022). “14 41 U.S.C. § 1707 . 5 Case: 22-30019 Document: 00516582132 Page: 6 Date Filed: 12/19/2022 No.”
Kristin Mayes v. Joseph Biden, 67 F.4th 921 (9th Cir. 2023). “The Procurement Policy Act The Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (“Procurement Policy Act”), 41 U.S.C. § 1707 , 1 states that a “procurement policy, regulation, procedure, or form .”
David Donovan v. Brian Vance, 70 F.4th 1167 (9th Cir. 2023). “(Procurement Act); 41 U.S.C. § 1707 (Procurement Policy Act); 5 U.”
Mayes v. Biden (D. Ariz. 2022). “Nor did 16 the notice claim that urgent and compelling circumstances merited forgoing the notice-and- 17 comment procedures set forth in the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act (the 18 “Procurement Policy Act”), 41 U.S.C. § 1707 (d). 19 The next day, September 29, 2021, the…”
Bayaud Enter., Inc. v. US Dep't of Vets. Affairs (D. Colo. 2020). “The final portion of this section of the brief is entitled “Defendants Violated Other Applicable Rulemaking Procedures,” and contends that the VA also violated 41 U.S.C. § 1707 (a statute governing the Office of Federal Procurement Policy), provisions in the Federal Acquisition…”
Louisiana v. Biden (W.D. La. 2021). “Plaintiff States argue that 41 U.S.C. § 1707 (a) requires the FAR Memo and the OMB determination to be published in the Federal Register for sixty days before it can take effect.”
Soda v. U.S. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (D. Maryland 2021). “) Plaintiff brought ten Counts, for violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, 41 U.S.C. § 1707 , and the First and Fifth Amendments to the U.”
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.