5 U.S.C. § 1003
Applicability
Historical and Revision Notes | ||
|---|---|---|
Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
1003 | 5 U.S.C. App. (FACA § 4) | Pub. L. 92–463, § 4, Oct. 6, 1972, 86 Stat. 771; Pub. L. 111–259, title IV, § 410(a), Oct. 7, 2010, 124 Stat. 2724. |
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 104
cases, 1947–1978 · leading case: Hannah v. Larche, 363 U.S. 420 (1960).
Hannah v. Larche, 363 U.S. 420 (1960). “238 , 5 U. S. C. § 1003 (rule making), and Section 5, 60 Stat.”
United States v. Storer Broad. Co., 351 U.S. 192 (1956). “As required by 5 U. S. C. § 1003 (b), the notice permitted "interested" parties to file statements or briefs.”
Am. Trucking Assns., Inc. v. United States, 344 U.S. 298 (1953). “237 , 239, 5 U. S. C. § 1003 . There is no question but that the Federal Register notice and participation requirements were satisfied.”
Fed. Power Comm'n v. Texaco Inc., 377 U.S. 33 (1964). “238 , 5 U. S. C. § 1003 . General notice of the proposed rule making was published in the Federal Register as required by § 4 (a) of that Act.”
Hotch v. United States, 212 F.2d 280 (9th Cir. 1954). “Administrative Procedure Act, Title 5 U.S.C.A. § 1003 (a), requires that: *282 “General notice of proposed rule making shall be published in the Federal Register (unless all persons subject thereto are named and either personally served or otherwise have actual notice thereof in…”
Anderson, Leech & Morse, Inc. v. Washington State Liquor Control Bd., 575 P.2d 221 (Wash. 1978). “That case states on page 296: *694 The New York Association also suggests that the rules do not contain "a concise general statement of their basis and purpose" in compliance with Section 4(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 1003 (b) [now § 553(c)]. But the order…”
California Citizens Band Accociation, Inc., a Corp. v. United States of Am. & Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 375 F.2d 43 (9th Cir. 1967). “§ 553 (b) (3) (1966), formerly 5 U.S.C. § 1003 (a) (3) (1964). It is there provided that notice of rule making shall include “either the terms or substance of the proposed rule or a description of the subjects and issues involved.”
Logansport Broad. Corp. v. United States, 210 F.2d 24 (D.C. Cir. 1954). “238 , 5 U.S.C.A. § 1003 (b); see Sen.Doc.No. 248, 79th Cong.”
Seaboard World Airlines, Inc. v. Gronouski, 230 F. Supp. 44 (D.D.C. 1964). “The plaintiff airline seeks to enjoin the Postmaster General from operating under the new policy on the assertion that the plaintiff was not accorded any of the procedural rights guaranteed by the Administrative Procedure Act under the so-called “rule-making” procedures of…”
Elof Hansson, Inc. v. United States, 178 F. Supp. 922 (Cust. Ct. 1959). “We conclude that the Administrative Procedure Act is applicable to proceedings under the Antidumping Act of 1921; that the Secretary, in making findings of dumping, is an administrative agency; that the Secretary’s finding is rule making; and that, therefore, the rule-making…”
Am. Airlines, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Bd., 359 F.2d 624 (D.C. Cir. 1966). “The procedure followed by the Board admittedly complies fully with the requirements for rule making established in section 4 of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 1003 . The question before us is whether this regulation effected a modification of petitioners’ existing…”
Gibson Wine Co., Inc. v. Snyder, 194 F.2d 329 (D.C. Cir. 1952). “238 (1946), 5 U.S.C.A. § 1003 . . And see the opening paragraphs of Procedure in Administrative Rule-Making, Rep.”
— 5 U.S.C. § 1003(a) — 2 cases
Wyman-Gordon Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 397 F.2d 394 (1st Cir. 1968).
George A. Rheman Co. v. United States, 133 F. Supp. 668 (E.D.S.C. 1955).
— 5 U.S.C. § 1003(b) — 1 case
W. Willard Wirtz, Sec'y of Labor v. Baldor Elec. Co., 337 F.2d 518 (D.C. Cir. 1964).
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.