12 C.F.R. § 308.38

Recommended decision and filing of record

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Filing of recommended decision and record. Within 45 days after expiration of the time allowed for filing reply briefs under § 308.37(b), the ALJ will file with and certify to the Administrative Officer, for decision, the record of the proceeding. The record must include the ALJ's recommended decision, recommended findings of fact, recommended conclusions of law, and proposed order; all prehearing and hearing transcripts, exhibits, and rulings; and the motions, briefs, memoranda, and other supporting papers filed in connection with the hearing. The ALJ will serve upon each party the recommended decision, findings, conclusions, and proposed order.

(b) Filing of index. At the same time the ALJ files with and certifies to the Administrative Officer for final determination the record of the proceeding, the ALJ will furnish to the Administrative Officer a certified index of the entire record of the proceeding. The certified index must include, at a minimum, an entry for each paper, document, or motion filed with the ALJ in the proceeding, the date of the filing, and the identity of the filer. The certified index must also include an exhibit index containing, at a minimum, an entry consisting of exhibit number and title or description for: each exhibit introduced and admitted into evidence at the hearing; each exhibit introduced but not admitted into evidence at the hearing; each exhibit introduced and admitted into evidence after the completion of the hearing; and each exhibit introduced but not admitted into evidence after the completion of the hearing.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2000–2022 · leading case: Raymond J. Lucia Companies, Inc. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 832 F.3d 277 (D.C. Cir. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Raymond J. Lucia Companies, Inc. v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 832 F.3d 277 (D.C. Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “at 1133 (citing 12 C.F.R. § 308.38 ). This court understood that it “was critical to the Court’s decision” in Freytag that the special trial judge had authority to issue final decisions in at least some cases, because it would have been “unnecessary” for the Court to consider…”

Landry v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 204 F.3d 1125 (D.C. Cir. 2000). · cites it 2× “The FDIC also makes a preliminary objection — that Landry has shown no prejudice from any Appointments Clause violation that may have occurred. The FDIC itself determined Landry’s responsibility after reviewing the ALJ’s recommended decision de novo.”

Harry Calcutt III v. FDIC, 37 F.4th 293 (6th Cir. 2022). “, dissenting); 12 C.F.R. § 308.38 (a). Second, “Congress has not tied the President’s hands and hindered his control over his subordinates here.”

Roque De La Fuente II v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., in Its Corp. Capacity, 332 F.3d 1208 (9th Cir. 2003). “First, De La Fuente claims that he was denied due process because the ALJ did not file his recommended decision for nearly two years after the termination of the hearing, much longer than the 45-day limit in the regulation, 12 C.F.R. § 308.38 (a). He argues that such an…”

Harry Calcutt III v. FDIC (6th Cir. 2022). “, dissenting); 12 C.F.R. § 308.38 (a). Second, “Congress has not tied the President’s hands and hindered his control over his subordinates here.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.