-
757 F.2d 354·
D.C. Cir.·
1985-03-26
·cited 12×
The court held that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is statutorily required to promulgate formal regulations (tolerances) for unavoidable poisonous or deleterious substances in food, rather than relying on informal action levels.
-
714 F.2d 1290·
5th Cir.·
1983-09-19
·cited 12×
The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) exceeded its statutory authority by extending motor carrier restriction removal rules to freight forwarders solely under its general rulemaking powers, as the relevant statutes did not grant such authority for freight f
-
684 F.2d 1007·
D.C. Cir.·
1982-07-30
·cited 12×
The court held that EPA's 'closure' test for NSO eligibility misinterprets 'reasonably available' under Section 119 and that EPA committed procedural errors by failing to adequately docket data and allow public comment on forecast data.
-
620 F.2d 84·
5th Cir.·
1980-06-26
·cited 12×
The court held that the EPA's designation of McLennan County as a nonattainment area was invalid because the agency failed to comply with the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.
-
830 F.2d 1441·
7th Cir.·
1987-09-28
·cited 10×
The court held that the statutory scheme and IRCA clearly indicate that illegal aliens are not eligible for AFDC and AFDC-UP benefits.
-
815 F.2d 1551·
D.C. Cir.·
1987-04-07
·cited 10×
The court held that the FCC's retroactive application of its lottery procedure to the Fresno market was valid, but its rejection of La Star's fill-in application as untimely was an error due to insufficient notice.
-
807 F.2d 225·
D.C. Cir.·
1986-12-19
·cited 10×
The court held that petitioners lack prudential standing to challenge OSHA's Notice of Interpretation because their interests are not arguably within the zone of interests protected or regulated by the OSH Act.
-
791 F.2d 1016·
2d Cir.·
1986-05-27
·cited 10×
The FCC's order is overturned because it failed to provide adequate notice of its intent to abandon the minority preference policy and relied on undisclosed data, rendering the decision arbitrary and capricious.
-
718 F.2d 449·
D.C. Cir.·
1983-09-20
·cited 10×
The court held that the Social Security Administration's notice-and-consent form did not meet the requirements of Internal Revenue Code subsection 6103(c) for disclosing confidential tax information, as it was coercive and lacked specificity.
-
979 F.2d 227·
D.C. Cir.·
1992-11-03
·cited 9×
The court held that the Department of Health and Human Services' Directives, which altered the interpretation of a prior regulation to permit doctors to counsel on abortion, constituted legislative rulemaking and were therefore subject to the Administrative Procedure Act's notice
-
819 F.2d 537·
5th Cir.·
1987-06-18
·cited 8×
The court held that SWPA provided adequate notice for its power allocation rulemaking and that the sale of power to TUEC as a scheduling agent for preference customers did not violate the Flood Control Act's preference clause.
-
772 F.2d 451·
8th Cir.·
1985-09-06
·cited 8×
The district court erred in ordering HHS to conduct notice and comment rulemaking for interpretive rules and in ruling on issues from a separate, consolidated case.
-
732 F.2d 1066·
2d Cir.·
1984-04-12
·cited 8×
A Social Security Ruling not promulgated through notice and comment rulemaking is interpretative and not binding on the court.
-
682 F.2d 419·
3d Cir.·
1982-06-22
·cited 8×
The court held that FIFRA's provisions for use and disclosure of proprietary pesticide data do not constitute an unconstitutional taking without just compensation, but certain EPA regulations were promulgated in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.
-
676 F.2d 1374·
11th Cir.·
1982-05-28
·cited 8×
The Interstate Commerce Act, specifically § 10762(e), does not authorize the Commission to reject or strike an effective tariff using the Tariff Integrity Board procedures for publishing errors.
-
939 F.2d 1047·
D.C. Cir.·
1991-07-23
·cited 6×
The court held that the NRC's sequestration rule is permissible, but the attorney exclusion rule is not, as it requires a more rigorous standard than the NRC's 'reasonable basis' test.
-
936 F.2d 1346·
D.C. Cir.·
1991-06-28
·cited 6×
The FBI may exempt its Letterhead Memorandum (LHM) from the Privacy Act's amendment requirements under subsections (j) and (k) because the LHM is exemptible as a matter of law and the FBI acted reasonably in exempting it.
-
862 F.2d 1228·
6th Cir.·
1988-11-28
·cited 6×
The court held that the Department of Health and Human Services' 1978 amendment imposing a maintenance amount ceiling was a substantive rule that could not be adopted without prior notice and opportunity for comment under the Administrative Procedure Act.
-
755 F.2d 1098·
4th Cir.·
1985-02-27
·cited 6×
The court held that the Department of Agriculture's notice of proposed rulemaking for the WIC Program did not provide adequate notice that flavored milk would be considered for elimination, thus violating the Administrative Procedure Act.
-
751 F.2d 1424·
D.C. Cir.·
1985-01-15
·cited 6×
The court held that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has the authority to publish policy guidance on labor-management relations, as its authority under Executive Order 11,491 was not superseded by specific provisions of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA).
-
631 F.2d 1353·
8th Cir.·
1980-09-23
·cited 6×
The court held that the USDA's regulations permitting nitrate and nitrite-free meat products to be sold under traditional names, with specific labeling, were a proper exercise of authority and not arbitrary, capricious, or unlawful.
-
980 F.2d 749·
D.C. Cir.·
1992-12-11
·cited 5×
The court held that the revised PRM § 226, requiring funds to be contractually committed before borrowing is considered necessary for Medicare reimbursement, is an interpretive rule not requiring notice and comment, and the Administrator's decision disallowing reimbursement was n
-
811 F.2d 1524·
D.C. Cir.·
1987-02-06
·cited 5×
The court held that the Secretary's exclusion of costs for sick newborn units as 'nursery' costs was arbitrary and capricious, and that the Provider Reimbursement Manual's restriction of standby fees to 'unmet guarantees' was an unreasonable interpretation of the Medicare Act.
-
912 F.2d 1525·
D.C. Cir.·
1990-08-31
·cited 4×
The court held that the EPA's interpretation of Section 115 of the Clean Air Act as a unitary proceeding requiring source identification before making endangerment findings is permissible, and that the Clay letters did not constitute final agency action denying the rulemaking pet
-
906 F.2d 756·
D.C. Cir.·
1990-06-26
·cited 4×
The court held that the Social Security Administration (SSA) had the authority to reopen an administrative law judge's decision on its own motion, that the recalculation and offset of retroactive benefits were permissible, and that the SSA's calculation method did not require not
-
874 F.2d 205·
4th Cir.·
1989-05-09
·cited 4×
The court held that the Consumer Product Safety Commission's "Statement of Interpretation" was a substantive rule, not an interpretation, because it changed existing policy and created new duties, requiring notice and comment procedures.
-
870 F.2d 717·
D.C. Cir.·
1989-03-24
·cited 4×
The court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is not required to reopen final well category determinations based on later-acquired information, as long as the original determination was based on the best available information at the time.
-
868 F.2d 441·
D.C. Cir.·
1989-02-28
·cited 4×
The court held that the Department of Transportation unlawfully failed to follow notice-and-comment procedures required by the Administrative Procedure Act when issuing its 1988 Orders, and that the states have standing to challenge these orders.
-
765 F.2d 121·
8th Cir.·
1985-06-19
·cited 4×
The court held that amendments to the ASCS handbook were interpretative rules exempt from notice-and-comment requirements.
-
649 F.2d 221·
4th Cir.·
1981-05-11
·cited 4×
The court held that the FDA's memorandum concerning approval of generic drug applications based on scientific literature is a general statement of policy, not a rule, and thus not subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements.
-
943 F.2d 1320·
D.C. Cir.·
1991-09-06
·cited 2×
The court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) failed to provide a reasoned explanation for its decision to retain an above-market incentive price for high-cost natural gas, particularly for post-NOPR wells, and for denying refunds for past overpayments.
-
938 F.2d 276·
D.C. Cir.·
1991-07-12
·cited 2×
The court held that the EPA's interpretation of CERCLA section 120(h) to apply notice requirements only to contamination occurring during federal ownership contradicts the statute's plain language, which extends to all owned property regardless of when contamination occurred.
-
934 F.2d 853·
7th Cir.·
1991-06-04
·cited 2×
The court held that the Secretary's 'patient-in-the-home' requirement for Medicaid certification is valid because it is implicit in existing federal regulations, not an improperly promulgated substantive rule.
-
893 F.2d 3·
1st Cir.·
1989-12-28
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court erred by consolidating a preliminary injunction hearing with a trial on the merits without providing clear notice to the parties, thus rendering the permanent injunction premature.
-
758 F.2d 503·
10th Cir.·
1985-03-26
·cited 2×
The court held that the Secretary of Health and Human Services has a duty to promulgate regulations regarding the payment of travel expenses for administrative hearings, and that this duty has not been implicitly repealed by subsequent appropriations measures.
-
757 F.2d 296·
D.C. Cir.·
1985-03-19
·cited 2×
The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission's decision to eliminate certain railroad reporting schedules was procedurally flawed because it relied on a prior policy statement that was not properly promulgated as a rule or binding adjudication, and the notice of rulemak
-
708 F.2d 297·
7th Cir.·
1983-05-25
·cited 2×
An agency's statement that it lacks statutory jurisdiction to enforce its regulation against another agency is an interpretive rule, not a legislative rule requiring notice and comment procedures.
-
104 F.4th 220·
11th Cir.·
2024-06-04
The Eleventh Circuit held that the IRS violated the Administrative Procedure Act by issuing Notice 2017-10 without public notice and comment, as Congress did not expressly exempt this procedure.
-
985 F.2d 1075·
D.C. Cir.·
1993-02-19
The court held that the FCC's 'flash cut' rule was supported by sufficient data on remand and that applying the rule during the remand period was not impermissible retroactive rulemaking.
-
980 F.2d 765·
D.C. Cir.·
1992-12-11
The court held that the EPA regulation allowing discretion to refuse to initiate withdrawal proceedings after determining a state no longer meets drinking water standards is contrary to the plain language of the Safe Drinking Water Act.
-
972 F.2d 331·
Fed. Cir.·
1992-08-07
The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims correctly set aside the Secretary's rescission of a VA manual provision because the rescission violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the Secretary's own regulations regarding notice and comment for substantive rule changes.
-
936 F.2d 1284·
D.C. Cir.·
1991-06-18
The court held that the Health Care Financing Administration adequately determined that its new nursing home regulations were at least as stringent as the prior ones, and that regulations merely restating statutory requirements did not need to undergo notice-and-comment procedure
-
813 F.2d 1006·
9th Cir.·
1987-03-30
The court reversed and remanded the case based on controlling precedent.