Section 2014 - Definitions

4 Citing briefs

  1. Beyond Nuclear et al v. U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room Gm-174 Ground Floor, South Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20585 et al

    MOTION for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support

    Filed November 4, 2016

    4 DOE is also authorized to enter into agreements for cooperation with foreign 4 References to “Commission” in the Atomic Energy Act are to the Atomic Energy Commission, the predecessor agency to DOE. See 42 U.S.C. § 2014(f). Case 1:16-cv-01641-TSC Document 15 Filed 11/04/16 Page 15 of 55 Case No. 1:16-cv-01641 Defendants’ Mem.

  2. Marcia L. Caronia, Linda McAuley and Arlene Feldman, Appellants,v.Philip Morris USA, Inc., Respondent.

    Brief

    Filed May 30, 2013

    Rainer v. Union Carbide Corp., 402 F.3d 608, 621 (6th Cir. 2005). As the Ninth Circuit noted in refusing to recognize subcellular change as bodily injury for purposes of the Price-Anderson Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2014(q), opening the door to medical monitoring and other claims based on subcellular change would result in "an unlocked cash register." Dumontier v. Schlumberger Tech. Corp., 543 F.3d 567, 571 (9th Cir. 2008).

  3. Sulemane v. Lew et al

    Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment

    Filed December 19, 2016

    to Dismiss at 11. 10 CIPA defines the term “Classified Information” to mean any information or material that has been determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive order, statute, or regulation, to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national security, and any restricted data, as defined in paragraph r. of section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2014) (y)). Defendants have not cited to any authority indicating how any of the law enforcement sensitive evidence relied upon require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national security, as determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive Order, statute, or regulation.

  4. Electronic Privacy Information Center v. United States Department of Homeland Security

    REPLY to opposition to motion re Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment MOTION for Hearing

    Filed December 2, 2011

    The Act actually allows withholding of information that creates “undue risk to the common defense and security” only if the information also constitutes “restricted data,” a term the statute defines as “data concerning (1) design, manufacture, or utilization of atomic weapons; (2) the production of special nuclear material; or (3) the use of special nuclear material in the production of energy, but shall not include [declassified data].” 42 U.S.C. § 2014 (y). Nothing resembling the articulation of such particular criteria exists in Section 114®.