Administrative Procedure Act

News & Analysis as of

Developments in Judicial Deference of Administrative Agency Actions

In my post of April 2, Divided Supreme Court Restricts Provider Challenges to State Medicaid Rates, I wrote about the March 31st Supreme Court decision that providers may not sue in federal court over the adequacy of state...more

From Dusk to Dawn: Battle Looming Over USDA Changes to Sunset Provision of Organic Rules

The USDA is facing a lawsuit in federal court stemming from its decision to unilaterally alter the process for exempting synthetic and non-organic substances used in producing organic food. Until September 2013, substances...more

Supreme Court Allows Changes to Agencies’ Interpretive Rules without the Notice-and-Comment Rulemaking Process

In March, the Supreme Court upheld an agency’s reversal of its own regulatory interpretation without requiring notice-and-comment rulemaking. Regulated entities now face considerable uncertainty in relying on agencies’...more

Otsuka’s Pediatric Labeling Dispute Seeks to Expand Orphan Drug Exclusivity

On April 13, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued an Order granting Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development and Commercialization, Inc., and Otsuka America...more

D.C. District Court Dismisses Delta’s Appeals Against U.S. Ex-Im Bank

In a series of three decisions published on March 30, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has dismissed appeals brought by Delta Air Lines and other plaintiffs against the U.S. Export-Import Bank...more

Open Season on Provider-controlled Licensing Boards

In a closely followed decision with significant consequences for state licensing boards and their members, the Supreme Court in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, 135 S. Ct. 1101...more

How might the Supreme Court’s decision in Perez v. MBA affect the CFPB?

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass’n invalidated a significant line of D.C. Circuit case law known, after the leading case, as the Paralyzed Veterans doctrine. A case involving a series...more

No Collateral Challenge of Patent Application Revival

In Exela Pharma Sciences, LLC v. Lee, the Federal Circuit held that the USPTO’s decision to revive a patent application “is not subject to third party collateral challenge” under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). In so...more

Supreme Court Allows Agencies to Reinterpret the Law at Their Discretion

In a decision published on March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court ended the D.C. Circuit Court’s Paralyzed Veterans doctrine, which required administrative agencies to utilize the Administrative Procedure Act’s (APA)...more

D.C. Federal District Court Dismisses Lawsuit Seeking to Block $13 Billion DOJ Settlement

On March 18, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a lawsuit brought by a non-profit organization challenging the $13 billion global settlement agreement entered by the U.S. Department of Justice...more

Presidential Memorandum Outlines Privacy Guidelines For Domestic Federal Use Of Drones

In a recently issued Presidential Memorandum, President Obama included privacy guidelines for the federal government’s use of unmanned aircraft systems (“UAS”) in the United States. Issued on February 15, 2015, and...more

NSBA Concerned About Recent Supreme Court Decision’s Impact on OCR Investigations

The National School Boards Association (NSBA) recently expressed its concerns over the Supreme Court’s recent landmark ruling in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, which allows federal agencies to issue “interpretive...more

Notice-and-Comment is Not Required for Changes Made to Interpretive Rules

On March 9, 2015, Justice Sotomayor, writing on behalf of the majority, overturned the Paralyzed Veterans doctrine, which requires federal agencies to use a notice-and-comment process before making a significant revision to...more

Supreme Court’s Perez Decision Shines the Light on Federal Agencies’ Authority to Use “Interpretations” (Often called Shadow...

Over the last three decades, federal agencies have increasingly used “interpretations” to “explain” what a formal regulation means, rather than to go through the more expensive, complicated and slow process of changing the...more

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Department of Labor’s Interpretation on Overtime Pay for Mortgage Loan Officers

For the past several years, an action by the Mortgage Bankers Association has been brewing in the courts challenging the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) for issuing contradictory opinion letters on whether mortgage loan...more

Federal Bank Supervisory Agencies May Change Guidance Without Notice-and- Comment Rulemaking

New rulemakings to implement financial reforms leave banking organizations facing a host of uncertainties. Guidance or “interpretative rules” from the financial regulators on the intended scope and application of new rules...more

Supreme Court Holds Notice-and-Comment Rulemaking Not Required to Change An Interpretive Rule

When federal agencies change their interpretive rules, they are exempt from the formal notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), says the Supreme Court in its recent ruling in...more

Supreme Court Rules That Agency Interpretive Rules Are Not Subject to Notice-and-Comment Rulemaking

Recently, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous judgment that government agency "interpretive rules" are not subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking, but cautioned that those same rules do not carry the "force and effect of...more

Supreme Court Ruling Makes Mortgage Loan Officers Eligible for Overtime Pay

Federal agencies now have the authority to interpret their own rules. On March 9, 2015, in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass’n, No. 13-1041, slip op. (U.S. Mar. 9, 2015), the United States Supreme Court effectively gave...more

Supreme Court Confirms That Agency Interpretative Rules Do Not Require Notice and Comment

In a March 9, 2015, decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass'n., the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that an interpretative rule issued by an administrative agency does not require notice and opportunity for comment,...more

Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights

The White House released its much anticipated legislative proposal on the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights Act (CPBRA) that was first floated in 2012. The CPBRA, if enacted (which seems unlikely before 2016), would provide...more

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Agency Interpretations Are Not Subject To Notice-and-Comment Rulemaking Requirement

In 2004, the DOL revamped its regulations regarding the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) administrative exemption. In 2006, the Bush DOL issued an opinion letter finding that mortgage loan officers qualified for the...more

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Landmark Ruling that Could Radically Change Employee Discipline

In a slip opinion released on Monday, March 9, 2015, styled Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass’n, No. 13-1041, slip op. (U.S. Mar. 9, 2015), the United States Supreme Court effectively gave federal agencies carte blanche to...more

Supreme Court Grants Federal Agencies Wide Discretion in Interpreting Regulations

On March 9, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) does not require federal agencies to go through the formal rulemaking process when making changes to rules interpreting regulations,...more

U.S. Supreme Court Notice, Comment Not Required for Federal Agencies Interpreting Regulations

The U.S. Supreme Court decided in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association that federal agencies are not required to use the Administrative Procedure Act's (APA) notice and comment procedures when issuing or making changes to...more

158 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 7

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.
×