OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Public Law 111-60

Note: This is the original legislation as it was initially enacted. Any subsequent amendments hosted on Wikisource may be listed using What Links Here.
An Act To extend the deadline for commencement of construction of a hydroelectric project.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

### Section 1. Extension.

    (a) In General.—
       Notwithstanding the time period specified in section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) that would otherwise apply to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission project numbered 12187, the Commission may, at the request of the licensee for the project, and after reasonable notice, in accordance with the good faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements of that section and the Commission's procedures under that section, extend the time period during which the licensee is required to commence the construction of the project for up to 3 consecutive 2-year periods from the date of the expiration of the extension originally issued by the Commission.
    (b) Reinstatement of Expired License.—
       If the period required for commencement of construction of the project described in subsection (a) has expired prior to the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission may reinstate the license effective as of the date of its expiration and the first extension authorized under subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of such expiration.
Approved August 19, 2009.

## Legislative History

* H.R. 2938
   * SENATE REPORTS:
   ** No. 111-68 (Comm. on Energy and Natural Resources)
   * CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009):
   ** July 22, considered and passed House.
   ** Aug. 5, considered and passed Senate.
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Public Law 111-64

Note: This is the original legislation as it was initially enacted. Any subsequent amendments hosted on Wikisource may be listed using What Links Here.
Joint Resolution Providing for the appointment of France A. Cordova as a citizen regent of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution.
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
    That, in accordance with section 5581 of the Revised Statutes (20 U.S.C. 43), the vacancy on the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, in the class other than Members of Congress, occurring by reason of the resignation of Eli Broad of California is filled by the appointment of France A. Cordova of Indiana. The appointment is for a term of 6 years, effective on the later of April 7, 2009, or the date of enactment of this joint resolution.
Approved September 18, 2009.

## Legislative History

* S.J.Res. 9, (H.J.Res. 25)
   * CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009):
   ** Mar. 17, considered and passed Senate.
   ** Sept. 9, considered and passed House.
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Public Law 111-55

Note: This is the original legislation as it was initially enacted. Any subsequent amendments hosted on Wikisource may be listed using What Links Here.
An Act To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 431 State Street in Ogdensburg, New York, as the ``Frederic Remington Post Office Building´´.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

### Section 1. Frederic Remington Post Office Building.

    (a) Designation.—
       The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 431 State Street in Ogdensburg, New York, shall be known and designated as the ``Frederic Remington Post Office Building´´.
    (b) References.—
       Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Frederic Remington Post Office Building´´.
Approved August 19, 2009.

## Legislative History

* H.R. 2090
   * CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009):
   ** June 3, considered and passed House.
   ** Aug. 4, considered and passed Senate.
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Public Law 111-57

Note: This is the original legislation as it was initially enacted. Any subsequent amendments hosted on Wikisource may be listed using What Links Here.
An Act To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1300 Matamoros Street in Laredo, Texas, as the ``Laredo Veterans Post Office´´.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

### Section 1. Laredo Veterans Post Office.

    (a) Designation.—
       The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1300 Matamoros Street in Laredo, Texas, shall be known and designated as the ``Laredo Veterans Post Office´´.
    (b) References.—
       Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Laredo Veterans Post Office´´.
Approved August 19, 2009.

## Legislative History

* H.R. 2325
   * CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009):
   ** June 15, considered and passed House.
   ** Aug. 4, considered and passed Senate.
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Public Law 111-58

Note: This is the original legislation as it was initially enacted. Any subsequent amendments hosted on Wikisource may be listed using What Links Here.
An Act To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2300 Scenic Drive in Georgetown, Texas, as the ``Kile G. West Post Office Building´´.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

### Section 1. Kile G. West Post Office Building.

    (a) Designation.—
       The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2300 Scenic Drive in Georgetown, Texas, shall be known and designated as the ``Kile G. West Post Office Building´´.
    (b) References.—
       Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Kile G. West Post Office Building´´.
Approved August 19, 2009.

## Legislative History

* H.R. 2422
   * CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009):
   ** June 15, considered and passed House.
   ** Aug. 4, considered and passed Senate.
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Public Law 111-56

Note: This is the original legislation as it was initially enacted. Any subsequent amendments hosted on Wikisource may be listed using What Links Here.
An Act To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 123 11th Avenue South in Nampa, Idaho, as the ``Herbert A Littleton Postal Station´´.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

### Section 1. Herbert A Littleton Postal Station.

    (a) Designation.—
       The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 123 11th Avenue South in Nampa, Idaho, shall be known and designated as the ``Herbert A Littleton Postal Station´´.
    (b) References.—
       Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Herbert A Littleton Postal Station´´.
Approved August 19, 2009.

## Legislative History

* H.R. 2162
   * CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009):
   ** June 3, considered and passed House.
   ** Aug. 4, considered and passed Senate.
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Roberts v. Ryer

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
91 U.S. 150
Roberts v. Ryer
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
The bill in this case was filed by the assignee of D. W. C. Sanford, alleging an infringement of a patent to Sanford for an improvement in refrigerators.
The principal defence relied upon was the prior invention of Lyman. The Circuit Court sustained this defence, and dismissed the bill. From this decree the complainant appealed.
Mr. Thomas A. Jenckes and Mr. George F. Seymour for the appellant.
Mr. F. H. Betts for the appellee.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Roberts v. Russell/Concurrence Black

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Per Curiam Opinion of the Court
* Concurring Opinion Black
United States Supreme Court
392 U.S. 293
Roberts v. Russell
Mr. Justice BLACK concurs in the Court's holding as to retroactivity for the reasons given in his dissent in Linkletter v. Walker, 381 U.S. 618, 640, 85 S.Ct. 1731, 1743, and not for the reasons given in the Court's opinion today.
Mr. Justice HARLAN and Mr. Justice WHITE dissent for the reasons stated in Mr. Justice WHITE'S dissenting opinion in Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, 138, 88 S.Ct. 1620, 1629 (1968).

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Roberts v. United States

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Roberts v. United States."
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* Roberts v. United States (92 U.S. 41)
* Roberts v. United States (320 U.S. 264)
* Roberts v. United States (389 U.S. 18)
See also United States v. Roberts.
# Roberts v. Richland Irrigation District

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
289 U.S. 71
Roberts v. Richland Irrigation District
Argued: Feb. 16, 1933. --- Decided: March 27, 1933
Appeal from the Supreme Court of the State of Washington.
Messrs.R. J. Venables and Charles H. Farrell, both of Seattle, Wash., for appellant.
Mr. O. B. Thorgrimson, of Seattle, Wash., for appellees.
Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Roberts v. Russell

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Concurring Opinion

    Black
United States Supreme Court
392 U.S. 293
Roberts v. Russell
On Petition For Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
No. 920, Misc. Argued: N/A --- Decided: June 10, 1968.
Bruton v. United States, 391 U.S. 123, which overruled Delli Paoli v. United States, 352 U.S. 232, and held that, despite instructions to the jury to disregard implicating statements in determining a codefendant's guilt or innocence, admission at a joint trial of a defendant's extrajudicial confession implicating a codefendant violates the codefendant's Sixth Amendment right to cross-examination, is to be applied retroactively, both to state and federal prosecutions.
Certiorari granted; judgment vacated and remanded.
George F. McCanless, Attorney General of Tennessee, and Paul E. Jennings, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Roberts v. United States (320 U.S. 264)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
320 U.S. 264
Roberts v. United States (320 U.S. 264)
Argued: Oct. 15-18, 1943. --- Decided: Nov 22, 1943
Mr. Newton B. Powell, of Decatur, Ala., for petitioner.
Mr. Paul A. Freund, of Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Rasquin v. Humphreys

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
308 U.S. 54
Rasquin v. Humphreys
Argued: Oct. 19, 1939. --- Decided: Nov 6, 1939
Mr. Frank Murphy, Atty. Gen., and Miss Helen R. Carloss, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.
Messrs. Sidney W. Davidson, and Allin H. Pierce, both of New York City, for respondent.
Mr. Justice STONE delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Rassmussen v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
197 U.S. 516
Rassmussen v. United States
Argued: and submitted November 4, 1904. --- Decided: April 10, 1905
Messrs. Robert W. Jennings and W. E. Crews for plaintiff in error.
Assistant Attorney General Robb for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice White delivered the opinion of the court:

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Ratcliffe

* Search for titles containing or beginning with: "Ratcliffe."
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
This is a disambiguation page. It lists works that share the same title. If an article link referred you here, please consider editing it to point directly to the intended page.
* Ratcliffe, Henry
* Ratcliffe, John (d.1610) (alias Sicklemore)
* Ratcliffe, John (d.1776)
* Ratcliffe, Thomas
# Rathbun v. United States

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikipedia article, Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
355 U.S. 107
Rathbun v. United States
Argued: Oct. 29, 1957. --- Decided: Dec 9, 1957
See 355 U.S. 925, 78 S.Ct. 363.
Mr. Thomas K. Hudson, Denver, Colo., for petitioner.
Mr. John F. Davis, Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Chief Justice WARREN delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Rather arid delight

Rather arid delight If Contentment accrue Make an abstemious Ecstasy Not so good as joy —
But Rapture's Expense Must not be incurred With a tomorrow knocking And the Rent unpaid —
# Roberts v. United States (389 U.S. 18)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
389 U.S. 18
Roberts v. United States (389 U.S. 18)
Thomas F. Call, for petitioner.
Acting Solicitor General Spritzer, Assistant Attorney General Vinson and Beatrice Rosenberg, for the United States.
PER CURIAM.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Roberts v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California/Opinion of the Court

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
United States Supreme Court
339 U.S. 844
Roberts v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Argued: March 31, 1950. --- Decided: June 5, 1950
Petitioner, who is confined in a California state prison, sought to file a petition in forma pauperis for a writ of injunction in the District Court below. That court denied leave to proceed in forma pauperis, holding that petitioner was not entitled to the benefits of 28 U.S.C. § 1915, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915, because he was no longer a 'citizen' as required by that section. The District Court reached that decision in reliance on California Penal Code, § 2600, which provides that one sentenced to imprisonment for a term of years is deprived of his civil rights for the period of imprisonment. The decision of the District Court is in error. Citizenship for the purpose of in forma pauperis proceedings in the federal courts is solely a matter of federal law. Congress has not specified criminal convictions, except for desertion and treason, as grounds for loss of citizenship. 8 U.S.C. § 801, 8 U.S.C.A. § 801.
Petitioner thereafter filed a motion in the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for allowance of an appeal from the order of the District Court. The denial by a District Judge of a motion to proceed in forma pauperis is an appealable order. 28 U.S.C. § 1291, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1291; see Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp., 1949, 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528. The Court of Appeals, however, held that it had 'no power to grant an application for allowance of an appeal,' and dismissed the petition.
Finally, petitioner filed in this Court a motion for leave to file a petition for a writ of mandamus to the District Court. Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, available only in rare cases. Ex parte Collett, 1949, 337 U.S. 55, 72, 69 S.Ct. 944, 953, 93 L.Ed. 1207, 10 A.L.R.2d 921, and cases there cited. Because of the ambiguous state of this record, and the fact that a denial of this motion will not prejudice petitioner in further attempts to proceed in forma pauperis, the motion must be denied. It is so ordered.
Motion denied.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Roberts v. United States (92 U.S. 41)

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.

## Dissenting Opinion

    Swayne
United States Supreme Court
92 U.S. 41
Roberts v. United States
APPEAL from the Court of Claims.
Submitted on printed arguments by Mr. Thomas Wilson for the appellant, and by Mr. Solicitor-General Phillips for the appellee.
MR. JUSTICE BRADLEY delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse