alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 713

To ensure the availability of spectrum to amateur radio operators. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 12, 2003

Mr. BILIRAKIS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL

To ensure the availability of spectrum to amateur radio 

operators.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Amateur Radio Spec5 trum Protection Act of 2003’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 The Congress finds the following: 

8 (1) More than 650,000 radio amateurs in the 

9 United States are licensed by the Federal Commu10 nications Commission. 
2

•HR 713 IH 

1 (2) Among the basic purposes of the Amateur 

2 Radio and Amateur Satellite Services are to provide 

3 voluntary, noncommercial radio service, particularly 

4 emergency communications. 

5 (3) Emergency communications services by vol6 unteer amateur radio operators have consistently 

7 and reliably been provided before, during, and after 

8 floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, forest fires, earth9 quakes, blizzards, train accidents, chemical spills, 

10 and other disasters. 

11 (4) The Federal Communications Commission 

12 has taken actions which have resulted in the loss of 

13 at least 107 MHz of spectrum to radio amateurs. 

14 SEC. 3. FEDERAL POLICY REGARDING REALLOCATION OF 

15 AMATEUR RADIO SPECTRUM. 

16 Section 303 of the Communications Act of 1934 is 

17 amended by adding at the end the following new sub18 section: 

19 ‘‘(z) Notwithstanding subsection (c), after July 1, 

20 2003—

21 ‘‘(1) make no reallocation of primary allocations 

22 of bands of frequencies of the amateur radio and 

23 amateur satellite services; 
3

•HR 713 IH 

1 ‘‘(2) not diminish the secondary allocations of 

2 bands of frequencies to the amateur radio or ama3 teur satellite service; and 

4 ‘‘(3) make no additional allocations within such 

5 bands of frequencies that would substantially reduce 

6 the utility thereof to the amateur radio or amateur 

7 satellite service; 

8 unless the Commission, at the same time, provides equiva9 lent replacement spectrum to amateur radio and amateur 

10 satellite service.’’.

Æ
#### William CURRIE v. MOORE-McCORMACK LINES, INC.

Civ. A. No. 58-884.

United States District Court D. Massachusetts.

April 22, 1959.

*661George P. Donovan, Boston, Mass., Leo V. Concannon, Boston, Mass., for plaintiff.

Bingham, Dana & Gould, Robert J. Hallisey, Boston, Mass., for defendant.

ALDRICH, District Judge.

This motion for production, the second in the case, raises a matter of general import. The question of what constitutes cause within Rule 34, F.R. Civ.P. 28 U.S.C.A., is often difficult, but it seems to me that there are certain somewhat standard situations which may carry their own showing of cause, if cause is to be construed as requiring, in addition to relevance, more-or-less uniqueness of source, and need outweighing any countervailing policy reasons for delaying discovery. Cf. Margeson v. Boston & Maine R. R., D.C.D.Mass., 16 F.R.D. 200. For example, a plaintiff who is suing his employer should normally be entitled to see his payroll or work records, and the ordinary work records of the defendant, such as the rough log and log of the ship. A defendant should normally be entitled to see the plaintiff’s federal income tax returns, Tollefsen v. Phillips, D.C.D.Mass., 16 F.R.D. 348, and his medical records, including the reports of doctors whom he has consulted for treatment. In the case at bar I have previously ordered the latter. The defendant has now heard that the plaintiff has been examined since the date of the earlier motion and that his condition has allegedly deteriorated. It renews its motion. The plaintiff replies that any later consultations have been only in preparation for trial. In this situation it seems to me the answer is routine. I order as follows, prospectively as well as past: (1) If there are any medical consultations or examinations for treatment, the defendant is entitled to a copy of the reports. (2) If there are any medical examinations solely for the purpose of preparation for trial, the defendant is entitled to a statement of any history given the doctor. Beyond that, the defendant is free to make its own examination of the plaintiff, and has no cause to be furnished with the findings or conclusions of plaintiff’s experts. Cf. Roberson v. Graham Corp., D.C.D.Mass., 14 F.R.D. 83. The expense of furnishing copies is to be borne by the defendant.