No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
TWENTY GRAND OFFSHORE, INC., Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-Apellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Counter Claimant-Appellee
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Counter Claimant-Appellee
04-30252.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Dec 3, 2004.
114 F. App'x 160
Cliffe E. Laborde, III, James D’Arensbourg Hollier, Laborde & Neuner, Lafayette, LA, Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-Appellant., Thomas Burton Thompson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Lafayette, LA, for Defendant-Counter Claimant-Appellee.
Reavley, Wiener, Benavides.
Unpublished
PER CURIAM:
*
The district court correctly upheld the Coast Guard Commandant’s decision as his interpretation of 46 C.F.R § 4.05-10(b) was not arbitrary or capricious. See Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 416, 91 S.Ct. 814, 823-24, 28 L.Ed.2d 136 (1971). It was not arbitrary or capricious to decide that a three-day delay of the written report failed to meet the “without delay” requirement of the statute if the written report is to satisfy the immediate notice requirement in 46 C.F.R. § 4.05-1(a). AFFIRMED.
*
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.