Question: When did people who started making an unlicensed version of the 40mm at the beginning of the war really begin to establish their own laws independent of the English?

full_context: Document 1: Anti-aircraft warfare: After World War I the US Army started developing a dual-role (AA/ground) automatic 37 mm cannon, designed by John M. Browning. It was standardised in 1927 as the T9 AA cannon, but trials quickly revealed that it was worthless in the ground role. However, while the shell was a bit light (well under 2 lbs) it had a good effective ceiling and fired 125 rounds per minute; an AA carriage was developed and it entered service in 1939. The Browning 37mm proved prone to jamming, and was eventually replaced in AA units by the Bofors 40 mm. The Bofors had attracted attention from the US Navy, but none were acquired before 1939. Also, in 1931 the US Army worked on a mobile anti-aircraft machine mount on the back of a heavy truck having four .30 caliber water-cooled machine guns and an optical director. It proved unsuccessful and was abandoned.
Document 2: Anti-aircraft warfare: German air attacks on the British Isles increased in 1915 and the AA efforts were deemed somewhat ineffective, so a Royal Navy gunnery expert, Admiral Sir Percy Scott, was appointed to make improvements, particularly an integrated AA defence for London. The air defences were expanded with more RNVR AA guns, 75 mm and 3-inch, the pom-poms being ineffective. The naval 3-inch was also adopted by the army, the QF 3 inch 20 cwt (76 mm), a new field mounting was introduced in 1916. Since most attacks were at night, searchlights were soon used, and acoustic methods of detection and locating were developed. By December 1916 there were 183 AA Sections defending Britain (most with the 3-inch), 74 with the BEF in France and 10 in the Middle East.
Document 3: Procedures of the Supreme Court of the United States: Thereafter, if the Court chooses to hold a hearing, each side has thirty minutes to present its case orally. In exceptional and controversial cases, however, the time limit may be extended. In the Court's early years, attorneys might argue a single case for hours or even days; but as the judicial workload increased, the time available for argument has been restricted. The late Chief Justice Rehnquist was noted for his especially strict enforcement of the argument time limits.
Document 4: Law of the United States: Unlike the situation with the states, there is no plenary reception statute at the federal level that continued the common law and thereby granted federal courts the power to formulate legal precedent like their English predecessors. Federal courts are solely creatures of the federal Constitution and the federal Judiciary Acts. However, it is universally accepted that the Founding Fathers of the United States, by vesting "judicial power" into the Supreme Court and the inferior federal courts in Article Three of the United States Constitution, thereby vested in them the implied judicial power of common law courts to formulate persuasive precedent; this power was widely accepted, understood, and recognized by the Founding Fathers at the time the Constitution was ratified. Several legal scholars have argued that the federal judicial power to decide "cases or controversies" necessarily includes the power to decide the precedential effect of those cases and controversies.
Document 5: Supreme Court of the United States: Article III of the United States Constitution does not specify the number of justices. The Judiciary Act of 1789 called for the appointment of six ``judges ''. Although an 1801 act would have reduced the size of the court to five members upon its next vacancy, an 1802 act promptly negated the 1801 act, legally restoring the court's size to six members before any such vacancy occurred. As the nation's boundaries grew, Congress added justices to correspond with the growing number of judicial circuits: seven in 1807, nine in 1837, and ten in 1863.
Document 6: Anti-aircraft warfare: The British had already arranged licence building of the Bofors 40 mm, and introduced these into service. These had the power to knock down aircraft of any size, yet were light enough to be mobile and easily swung. The gun became so important to the British war effort that they even produced a movie, The Gun, that encouraged workers on the assembly line to work harder. The Imperial measurement production drawings the British had developed were supplied to the Americans who produced their own (unlicensed) copy of the 40 mm at the start of the war, moving to licensed production in mid-1941.
Document 7: Law of the United States: As federal judge Alex Kozinski has pointed out, binding precedent as we know it today simply did not exist at the time the Constitution was framed. Judicial decisions were not consistently, accurately, and faithfully reported on both sides of the Atlantic (reporters often simply rewrote or failed to publish decisions which they disliked), and the United Kingdom lacked a coherent court hierarchy prior to the end of the 19th century. Furthermore, English judges in the eighteenth century subscribed to now-obsolete natural law theories of law, by which law was believed to have an existence independent of what individual judges said. Judges saw themselves as merely declaring the law which had always theoretically existed, and not as making the law. Therefore, a judge could reject another judge's opinion as simply an incorrect statement of the law, in the way that scientists regularly reject each other's conclusions as incorrect statements of the laws of science.
Document 8: Anti-aircraft warfare: As aircraft started to be used against ground targets on the battlefield, the AA guns could not be traversed quickly enough at close targets and, being relatively few, were not always in the right place (and were often unpopular with other troops), so changed positions frequently. Soon the forces were adding various machine-gun based weapons mounted on poles. These short-range weapons proved more deadly, and the "Red Baron" is believed to have been shot down by an anti-aircraft Vickers machine gun. When the war ended, it was clear that the increasing capabilities of aircraft would require better means of acquiring targets and aiming at them. Nevertheless, a pattern had been set: anti-aircraft weapons would be based around heavy weapons attacking high-altitude targets and lighter weapons for use when they came to lower altitudes.
Document 9: United States: The original text of the Constitution establishes the structure and responsibilities of the federal government and its relationship with the individual states. Article One protects the right to the "great writ" of habeas corpus. The Constitution has been amended 27 times; the first ten amendments, which make up the Bill of Rights, and the Fourteenth Amendment form the central basis of Americans' individual rights. All laws and governmental procedures are subject to judicial review and any law ruled by the courts to be in violation of the Constitution is voided. The principle of judicial review, not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, was established by the Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison (1803) in a decision handed down by Chief Justice John Marshall.
Document 10: Anti-aircraft warfare: Poland's AA defences were no match for the German attack and the situation was similar in other European countries. Significant AA warfare started with the Battle of Britain in the summer of 1940. 3.7-inch HAA were to provide the backbone of the groundbased AA defences, although initially significant numbers of 3-inch 20-cwt were also used. The Army's Anti-aircraft command, which was under command of the Air Defence UK organisation, grew to 12 AA divisions in 3 AA corps. 40-mm Bofors entered service in increasing numbers. In addition the RAF regiment was formed in 1941 with responsibility for airfield air defence, eventually with Bofors 40mm as their main armament. Fixed AA defences, using HAA and LAA, were established by the Army in key overseas places, notably Malta, Suez Canal and Singapore.
Document 11: .55 Boys: The .55 Boys was adopted and manufactured alongside the Boys Anti-Tank Rifle in 1937 throughout the Commonwealth of Nations by firms such as Kynoch. However, when the United Kingdom entered World War II, the .55 Boys round was soon found to be insufficient against even early war Axis tanks in late 1939 and 1940. However, the United Kingdom had to rely on the .55 Boys round for several years because no better infantry anti-tank weapons were available. When the PIAT anti-tank weapon was introduced in 1943, the shaped charges it fired proved to be far more effective against enemy armor than the .55 Boys round had The Boys rifle was phased out of service as the PIAT became the British military's primary handheld anti-tank weapon. Despite its lack of effectiveness as an anti-tank weapon, the .55 Boys was used throughout World War II in both the Pacific and Atlantic theaters and also saw use during the Winter War and Continuation War by Finland. By the conclusion of World War II, the .55 Boys was no longer used in any major capacity.
Document 12: Anti-aircraft warfare: Some nations started rocket research before World War II, including for anti-aircraft use. Further research started during the war. The first step was unguided missile systems like the British 2-inch RP and 3-inch, which was fired in large numbers from Z batteries, and were also fitted to warships. The firing of one of these devices during an air raid is suspected to have caused the Bethnal Green disaster in 1943. Facing the threat of Japanese Kamikaze attacks the British and US developed surface-to-air rockets like British Stooge or the American Lark as counter measures, but none of them were ready at the end of the war. The Germans missile research was the most advanced of the war as the Germans put considerable effort in the research and development of rocket systems for all purposes. Among them were several guided and unguided systems. Unguided systems involved the Fliegerfaust (literally "aircraft fist") as the first MANPADS. Guided systems were several sophisticated radio, wire, or radar guided missiles like the Wasserfall ("waterfall") rocket. Due to the severe war situation for Germany all of those systems were only produced in small numbers and most of them were only used by training or trial units.
Document 13: Anti-aircraft warfare: Britain had successful tested a new HAA gun, 3.6-inch, in 1918. In 1928 3.7-inch became the preferred solution, but it took 6 years to gain funding. Production of the QF 3.7-inch (94 mm) began in 1937; this gun was used both on mobile carriages with the field army and transportable guns on fixed mountings for static positions. At the same time the Royal Navy adopted a new 4.5-inch (114 mm) gun in a twin turret, which the army adopted in simplified single-gun mountings for static positions, mostly around ports where naval ammunition was available. However, the performance of both 3.7 and 4.5-in guns was limited by their standard fuse No 199, with a 30-second running time, although a new mechanical time fuse giving 43 seconds was nearing readiness. In 1939 a Machine Fuse Setter was introduced to eliminate manual fuse setting.
Document 14: English law: Since 1189, English law has been described as a common law rather than a civil law system; in other words, no comprehensive codification of the law has taken place and judicial precedents are binding as opposed to persuasive. This may be a legacy of the Norman conquest of England, when a number of legal concepts and institutions from Norman law were introduced to England. In the early centuries of English common law, the justices and judges were responsible for adapting the system of writs to meet everyday needs, applying a mixture of precedent and common sense to build up a body of internally consistent law. An example is the Law Merchant derived from the ``Pie - Powder ''Courts, named from a corruption of the French pieds - poudrés (`` dusty feet'') implying ad hoc marketplace courts. As the Parliament of England became ever more established and influential, legislation gradually overtook judicial law - making such that today, judges are only able to innovate in certain very narrowly defined areas.
Document 15: Law of the United States: Early on, American courts, even after the Revolution, often did cite contemporary English cases. This was because appellate decisions from many American courts were not regularly reported until the mid-19th century; lawyers and judges, as creatures of habit, used English legal materials to fill the gap. But citations to English decisions gradually disappeared during the 19th century as American courts developed their own principles to resolve the legal problems of the American people. The number of published volumes of American reports soared from eighteen in 1810 to over 8,000 by 1910. By 1879 one of the delegates to the California constitutional convention was already complaining: "Now, when we require them to state the reasons for a decision, we do not mean they shall write a hundred pages of detail. We [do] not mean that they shall include the small cases, and impose on the country all this fine judicial literature, for the Lord knows we have got enough of that already."
ground_truth: mid-19th century
sub_queries: Who started making an unlicensed version of the 40mm at the beginning of the war? Answer: Americans
When did Americans really begin to establish their own laws independent of the English? Answer: mid-19th century