OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# United States Code/Title 35/Chapter 10/Section 105

From the U.S. House of Representatives.
Section 105. Inventions in outer space
(a) Any invention made, used or sold in outer space on a space object or component thereof under the jurisdiction or control of the United States shall be considered to be made, used or sold within the United States for the purposes of this title, except with respect to any space object or component thereof that is specifically identified and otherwise provided for by an international agreement to which the United States is a party, or with respect to any space object or component thereof that is carried on the registry of a foreign state in accordance with the Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space.
(b) Any invention made, used or sold in outer space on a space object or component thereof that is carried on the registry of a foreign state in accordance with the Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, shall be considered to be made, used or sold within the United States for the purposes of this title if specifically so agreed in an international agreement between the United States and the state of registry.

## Source

(Added Pub. L. 101-580, Sec. 1(a), Nov. 15, 1990, 104 Stat. 2863.)

## Effective Date; Special Rules

Section 2 of Pub. L. 101-580 provided that:
    “(a) Effective Date.—Subject to subsections (b), (c), and (d) of this section, the amendments made by the first section of this Act [enacting this section] shall apply to all United States patents granted before, on, or after the date of enactment of this Act [Nov. 15, 1990], and to all applications for United States patents pending on or filed on or after such date of enactment.
    “(b) Final Decisions.—The amendments made by the first section of this Act [enacting this section] shall not affect any final decision made by a court or the Patent and Trademark Office before the date of enactment of this Act [Nov. 15, 1990] with respect to a patent or an application for a patent, if no appeal from such decision is pending and the time for filing an appeal has expired.
    “(c) Pending Cases.—The amendments made by the first section of this Act [enacting this section] shall not affect the right of any party in any case pending in a court on the date of enactment of this Act [Nov. 15, 1990] to have the party's rights determined on the basis of the substantive law in effect before such date of enactment.
    “(d) Non-Applicability.—The amendments made by the first section of this Act [enacting this section] shall not apply to any process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter, an embodiment of which was launched prior to the date of enactment of this Act [Nov. 15, 1990].”
# United States Code/Title 35/Chapter 10/Section 100

From the U.S. House of Representatives.
Section 100. Definitions
When used in this title unless the context otherwise indicates—
(a) The term “invention” means invention or discovery.
(b) The term “process” means process, art or method, and includes a new use of a known process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or material.
(c) The terms “United States” and “this country” mean the United States of America, its territories and possessions.
(d) The word “patentee” includes not only the patentee to whom the patent was issued but also the successors in title to the patentee.
(e) The term “third-party requester” means a person requesting ex parte reexamination under section 302 or inter partes reexamination under section 311 who is not the patent owner.

## Source

(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 797; Pub. L. 106-113, div. B, Sec. 1000(a)(9) [title IV, Sec. 4603], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A-567.)

## Historical and Revision Notes

Paragraph (a) is added only to avoid repetition of the phrase “invention or discovery” and its derivatives throughout the revised title. The present statutes use the phrase “invention or discovery” and derivatives.
Paragraph (b) is noted under section 101.
Paragraphs (c) and (d) are added to avoid the use of long expressions in various parts of the revised title.

## Amendments
### 1999

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 106-113 added subsec. (e).

#### Effective Date of 1999 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 106-113 effective Nov. 29, 1999, and applicable to any patent issuing from an original application filed in the United States on or after that date, see section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, Sec. 4608(a)] of Pub. L. 106-113, set out as a note under section 41 of this title.
# United States Code/Title 35/Chapter 11

From the U.S. House of Representatives.
Chapter 11. Application for Patent
* Section 111. Application
* Section 112. Specification
* Section 113. Drawings
* Section 114. Models, specimens
* Section 115. Oath of applicant
* Section 116. Inventors
* Section 117. Death or incapacity of inventor
* Section 118. Filing by other than inventor
* Section 119. Benefit of earlier filing date; right of priority
* Section 120. Benefit of earlier filing date in the United States
* Section 121. Divisional applications
* Section 122. Confidential status of applications; publication of patent applications

## Amendments
### 2002

Pub. L. 107-273, div. C, title III, Sec. 13206(a)(7), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1904, substituted "Inventors" for "Joint inventors" in item 116.

### 1999

Pub. L. 106-113, div. B, Sec. 1000(a)(9) [title IV, Sec. 4507(5)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A-566, inserted "; publication of patent applications" after "applications" in item 122.

### 1994

Pub. L. 103-465, title V, Sec. 532(c)(6), Dec. 8, 1994, 108 Stat. 4987, substituted "Application" for "Application for patent" in item 111 and "Benefit of earlier filing date; right of priority" for "Benefit of earlier filing date in foreign country; right of priority" in item 119.
# United States Code/Title 5/Chapter 5/Section 503

§ 503. Witness fees and allowances
    (a) For the purpose of this section, ``agency'' has the meaning given it by section 5721 of this title.
    (b) A witness is entitled to the fees and allowances allowed by statute for witnesses in the courts of the United States when--
       (1) he is subpenaed under section 304(a) of this title; or
       (2) he is subpenaed to and appears at a hearing before an agency authorized by law to hold hearings and subpena witnesses to attend the hearings.
# United States Code/Title 5/Chapter 5/Section 555

§ 555. Ancillary matters
    (a) This section applies, according to the provisions thereof, except as otherwise provided by this subchapter.
    (b) A person compelled to appear in person before an agency or representative thereof is entitled to be accompanied, represented, and advised by counsel or, if permitted by the agency, by other qualified representative. A party is entitled to appear in person or by or with counsel or other duly qualified representative in an agency proceeding. So far as the orderly conduct of public business permits, an interested person may appear before an agency or its responsible employees for the presentation, adjustment, or determination of an issue, request, or controversy in a proceeding, whether interlocutory, summary, or otherwise, or in connection with an agency function. With due regard for the convenience and necessity of the parties or their representatives and within a reasonable time, each agency shall proceed to conclude a matter presented to it. This subsection does not grant or deny a person who is not a lawyer the right to appear for or represent others before an agency or in an agency proceeding.
    (c) Process, requirement of a report, inspection, or other investigative act or demand may not be issued, made, or enforced except as authorized by law. A person compelled to submit data or evidence is entitled to retain or, on payment of lawfully prescribed costs, procure a copy or transcript thereof, except that in a nonpublic investigatory proceeding the witness may for good cause be limited to inspection of the official transcript of his testimony.
    (d) Agency subpenas authorized by law shall be issued to a party on request and, when required by rules of procedure, on a statement or showing of general relevance and reasonable scope of the evidence sought. On contest, the court shall sustain the subpena or similar process or demand to the extent that it is found to be in accordance with law. In a proceeding for enforcement, the court shall issue an order requiring the appearance of the witness or the production of the evidence or data within a reasonable time under penalty of punishment for contempt in case of contumacious failure to comply.
    (e) Prompt notice shall be given of the denial in whole or in part of a written application, petition, or other request of an interested person made in connection with any agency proceeding. Except in affirming a prior denial or when the denial is self-explanatory, the notice shall be accompanied by a brief statement of the grounds for denial.
# United States Code/Title 5/Chapter 5/Section 502

§ 502. Administrative practice; Reserves and National Guardsmen
Membership in a reserve component of the armed forces or in the National Guard does not prevent an individual from practicing his civilian profession or occupation before, or in connection with, an agency of the United States.
# United States Code/Title 5/Chapter 5/Section 553

§ 553. Rule making
    (a) This section applies, according to the provisions thereof, except to the extent that there is involved—
       (1) a military or foreign affairs function of the United States; or
       (2) a matter relating to agency management or personnel or to public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts.
    (b) General notice of proposed rule making shall be published in the Federal Register, unless persons subject thereto are named and either personally served or otherwise have actual notice thereof in accordance with law. The notice shall include—
       (1) a statement of the time, place, and nature of public rule making proceedings;
       (2) reference to the legal authority under which the rule is proposed; and
       (3) either the terms or substance of the proposed rule or a description of the subjects and issues involved.
    Except when notice or hearing is required by statute, this subsection does not apply—
          (A) to interpretative rules, general statements of policy, or rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice; or
          (B) when the agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefor in the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.
    (c) After notice required by this section, the agency shall give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making through submission of written data, views, or arguments with or without opportunity for oral presentation. After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the agency shall incorporate in the rules adopted a concise general statement of their basis and purpose. When rules are required by statute to be made on the record after opportunity for an agency hearing, sections 556 and 557 of this title apply instead of this subsection.
    (d) The required publication or service of a substantive rule shall be made not less than 30 days before its effective date, except—
       (1) a substantive rule which grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction;
       (2) interpretative rules and statements of policy; or
       (3) as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule.
    (e) Each agency shall give an interested person the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule.
# Unclassified Summary of Evidence for Administrative Review Board in the case of Shamsullah

* related portals: Guantanamo.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
Wikified from pages 10-11 of http://www.dod.mil/pubs/foi/detainees/csrt/ARB_Factors_Set_1_944-1045.pdf, on April 28, 2007.
UNCLASSIFIED
Department of Defense Office for the Administrative Review of the Detention of Enemy Combatants at US Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba
| From: | Presiding Officer |
| To: | Ullah, Shams |
| Via: | Assisting Military Officer |
| Subject: | Unclassified Summary of Evidence for Administrative Review Board in the case of Ullah, Shams |
| 1. | An Administrative Review Board will be convened to review your case to determine if your continued detention is necessary. |
| 2. | The Administrative Review Board will conduct a comprehensive review of all reasonably available and relevant information regarding your case. At the conclusion of this review die Board will make a recommendation to: (1) release you to your home state or to a third state; (2) transfer you to your home state, or a third state, with conditions agreed upon by the United States and your home state, or the third state; or (3) continue your detention under United States control |
| 3. | The following primary factors favor continued detention: |
| | a.Commitment to Jihad and Extremism 1. Detainee was wounded in a firefight against the United States and its coalition forces. 2. Detainee was told by Umted States and the Afghanistan Military forces to stop. The detainee subsequently fired a full magazine of ammunition at the United States and Afghanistan Military forces. b.Connections and Associations 1. Detainee was associated with a suspected member of Jama'at Tablighi [sic]. 2. Jama'at Tablighi, a Pakistan based Islamic missonary organization is being used as a cover to mask travel and activities of terrorists including members of al Qaida. 3. Detainee is assessed as having familial ties to al Qaida. 4. Detainee is associated with a possible al Qaida cell leader. |
| 4. | The following primary factors favor release or transfer: |
| | a. The detainee denied having any knowledge of the attacks in the United States prior to their execution on 11 September 2001. b. Detainee said the work he performed as a security force member was to respond to fights within the village when they involved rival tribes. c. The detainee said he was just a store vendor. d. The detainee denied being a Taliban member. e. The detainee claimed he only owned an AK-47 to protect himself and his family. |
| 5. | You will be afforded a meaningful opportunity to be heard and to present information to the Board; this includes an opportunity to be physically present at the proceeding. The Assisting Military Officer (AMO) will assist you in reviewing all relevant and reasonably available unclassified information regarding your case. The AMO is not an advocate for or against continued detention, nor may me AMO form a confidential relationship with you or represent you in any other matter. |
# United States v. Colorado Anthracite Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
225 U.S. 219
United States v. Colorado Anthracite Company
Argued: April 25, 1912. --- Decided: May 27, 1912
Assistant Attorney General Thompson for appellant.
Messrs. Charles A. Keigwin and E. W. Spalding for appellee.
Mr. Justice Van Devanter 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
# United States v. Coleman

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
390 U.S. 599
United States et al. v. Coleman et al.
Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
No. 630. Argued: March 28, 1968. --- Decided: April 22, 1968
Respondent Coleman sought a patent to lands in a national forest predicated on 30 U.S.C. § 22, under which title to land owned by the United States containing "valuable mineral deposits" may be issued to the discoverer of the deposits, and on 30 U.S.C. § 161 allowing claims to lands "chiefly valuable for building stone." Coleman contended that deposits of quartzite (one of the most common of all solid materials) qualified under those provisions. The Secretary of the Interior denied the patent application, holding (1) that to qualify for a patent under § 22 it must be shown that the mineral can be "extracted, removed and marketed at a profit," a test which on the largely undisputed evidence Coleman could not meet, and (2) that the quartzite was a "common variety of stone" which, under 30 U.S.C. § 611, could not qualify for a claim under the mining laws. When Coleman remained on the land, the Government brought this ejectment action against Coleman and his lessee and they counterclaimed for issuance of a patent. The District Court rendered summary judgment for the Government. The Court of Appeals reversed.
Held:
    1. The determination of the Secretary of the Interior that the quartzite did not qualify as a valuable mineral deposit because it could not be marketed at a profit must be upheld as a reasonable interpretation of 30 U.S.C. § 22. Pp. 601-603.
    2. The Secretary correctly ruled that "[i]n view of the immense quantities of identical stone found in the area outside the claims, the stone must be considered a 'common variety'" and thus under 30 U.S.C. § 611 is excluded from the mining laws. Pp. 603-605.
363 F. 2d 190, 379 F. 2d 555, reversed and remanded.
Frank J. Barry argued the cause for the United States et al. On the brief were Solicitor General Griswold, Assistant Attorney General Martz, Robert S. Rifkind, Roger P. Marquis and George R. Hyde.
Howard A. Twitty argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were George W. Nilsson, W. Howard Gray, Edward A. McCabe and Monta W. Shirley.
Winston S. Howard and Don H. Sherwood filed a brief for the New Jersey Zinc Co., as amicus curiae.

## 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
# United States v. Colgate & Company

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
250 U.S. 300
United States v. Colgate & Company
Argued: March 10, 1919. --- Decided: June 2, 1919
Mr. G. Carroll Todd, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the United States.
Mr. Charles E. Hughes, of New York City, for defendant in error.
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
# United States v. Cohn

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
270 U.S. 339
United States v. Cohn
Argued: Jan. 13, 1926. --- Decided: March 1, 1926
Messrs. Solicitor General Mitchell and Assistant Attorney General Donovan, for the United States.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 339-341 intentionally omitted]
Messrs. Bernhardt Frank and Benjamin P. Epstein, both of Chicago, Ill., for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice SANFORD 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
# United States Code/Title 18/Part I/Chapter 55/Section 1204

Office of the Law Revision Counsel, laws in effect as of November 9, 2020.
(a) Whoever removes a child from the United States, or attempts to do so, or retains a child (who has been in the United States) outside the United States with intent to obstruct the lawful exercise of parental rights shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both.
(b) As used in this section-
(1) the term "child" means a person who has not attained the age of 16 years; and
(2) the term "parental rights", with respect to a child, means the right to physical custody of the child-
(A) whether joint or sole (and includes visiting rights); and
(B) whether arising by operation of law, court order, or legally binding agreement of the parties.
(c) It shall be an affirmative defense under this section that-
(1) the defendant acted within the provisions of a valid court order granting the defendant legal custody or visitation rights and that order was obtained pursuant to the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act or the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act and was in effect at the time of the offense;
(2) the defendant was fleeing an incidence or pattern of domestic violence; or
(3) the defendant had physical custody of the child pursuant to a court order granting legal custody or visitation rights and failed to return the child as a result of circumstances beyond the defendant's control, and the defendant notified or made reasonable attempts to notify the other parent or lawful custodian of the child of such circumstances within 24 hours after the visitation period had expired and returned the child as soon as possible.
(d) This section does not detract from The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Parental Child Abduction, done at The Hague on October 25, 1980.
(Added Pub. L. 103–173, §2(a), Dec. 2, 1993, 107 Stat. 1998 ; amended Pub. L. 108–21, title I, §107, Apr. 30, 2003, 117 Stat. 655 .)
Amendments
2003-Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 108–21, §107(1), inserted ", or attempts to do so," before "or retains".
Subsec. (c)(1). Pub. L. 108–21, §107(2)(A), inserted "or the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act" before "and was".
Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 108–21, §107(2)(B), inserted "or" after semicolon at end.
Sense of Congress Regarding Use of Procedures Under The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Parental Child Abduction
Section 2(b) of Pub. L. 103–173 provided that: "It is the sense of the Congress that, inasmuch as use of the procedures under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Parental Child Abduction has resulted in the return of many children, those procedures, in circumstances in which they are applicable, should be the option of first choice for a parent who seeks the return of a child who has been removed from the parent."
# United States Code/Title 18/Part I/Chapter 71/Section 1460

Office of the Law Revision Counsel, laws in effect as of November 9, 2020.
(a) Whoever, either-
(1) in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or on any land or building owned by, leased to, or otherwise used by or under the control of the Government of the United States; or
(2) in the Indian country as defined in section 1151 of this title,
knowingly sells or possesses with intent to sell an obscene visual depiction shall be punished by a fine in accordance with the provisions of this title or imprisoned for not more than 2 years, or both.
(b) For the purposes of this section, the term "visual depiction" includes undeveloped film and videotape but does not include mere words.
(Added Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, §7526(a), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4503 ; amended Pub. L. 101–647, title III, §323(c), Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4819 .)
Amendments
1990-Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 101–647, §323(c)(1), struck out "or a visual depiction of a minor engaging in or assisting another person to engage in sexually explicit conduct," after "visual depiction" in concluding provisions.
Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 101–647, §323(c)(2), amended subsec. (b) generally. Prior to amendment, subsec. (b) read as follows: "For the purposes of this section-
"(1) the term 'visual depiction' includes undeveloped film and videotape but does not include mere words; and
"(2) the terms 'minor' and 'sexually explicit conduct' have the meaning given those terms in chapter 110 of this title."