42 U.S.C. § 1883
Office of Small Business Research and Development
The National Science Foundation is authorized and directed to establish an Office of Small Business Research and Development. The Foundation through the Office of Small Business Research and Development and in cooperation and consultation with the Small Business Administration shall—(1) foster communication between the National Science Foundation and the small business community, and insure that the set-aside for small business concerns provided under this Act or any other Act authorizing appropriations for the National Science Foundation is fully and effectively utilized;(2) collect, analyze, compile, and publish information concerning grants and contracts awarded to small business concerns by the Foundation, and the procedures for handling proposals submitted by small business concerns;(3) assist individual small business concerns in obtaining information regarding programs, policies, and procedures of the Foundation, and assure the expeditious processing of proposals by small business concerns based on scientific and technical merit; and(4) recommend to the Director and to the National Science Board such changes in the procedures and practices of the Foundation as may be required to enable the Foundation to draw fully on the resources of the small business research and development community.(Pub. L. 94–471, § 8, Oct. 11, 1976, 90 Stat. 2057; Pub. L. 99–386, title I, § 108, Aug. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 822.)Editorial NotesReferences in TextThis Act, referred to in par. (1), is Pub. L. 94–471, Oct. 11, 1976, 90 Stat. 2053, known as the National Science Foundation Authorization Act, 1977, which, insofar as classified to the Code, enacted sections 1882 and 1883 of this title, amended section 1863 of this title, and enacted provisions set out as notes under sections 1862, 1864, 1873, and 5820 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title of 1976 Amendment note set out under section 1861 of this title and Tables.
CodificationSection was enacted as part of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act, 1977, and not as part of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 which comprises this chapter.
Amendments1986—Par. (5). Pub. L. 99–386 struck out par. (5) which related to quarterly reports to Congress concerning activities of Office of Small Business Research and Development.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1974–2024 · leading case:
Keenan v. Allan, 889 F. Supp. 1320 (E.D. Wash. 1995).
Keenan v. Allan, 889 F. Supp. 1320 (E.D. Wash. 1995).
“To establish a 42 U.S.C. § 1883 claim of wrongful retaliation under the First Amendment, a public employee must prove: (1) the statement that brought on the retaliation is one of “public concern,” (2) the constitutionally protected expression is a “substantial” or “motivational”…”
John R. Hansen v. Raymond W. May, 502 F.2d 728 (9th Cir. 1974).
“While Hansen drafted his complaint on the standard form, “Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus,” he clearly indicated that he was not challenging any conviction or seeking release from custody, but only seeking the return of his property or reimbursement therefor.”
Ortiz v. Apfel, 39 F. Supp. 2d 1275 (D. Kan. 1998).
“This section applies to final determinations of the Commissioner under Title XVI, furthermore, through 42 U.S.C. § 1883 (c)(3). Section 405(g) provides that “[t]he findings of the Commissioner of Social Security as to any fact, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be…”
Bolden v. Contra Costa Cnty. (N.D. Cal. 2022).
“1 under both 42 U.S.C. § 1883 and state common law are barred by his failure to exhaust the Contra 2 Costa County custodial grievance process under the PLRA.”
Wittmeyer v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (W.D.N.Y. 2024).
“1; 42 U.S.C. § 1883 (c)(8). The parties filed cross-motions for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, and Plaintiff filed a reply brief.”
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.