C.F.R. » Title 13 » CHAPTER I—SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION › PART 134—RULES OF PROCEDURE GOVERNING CASES BEFORE THE OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS › Subpart B—Rules of Practice

13 C.F.R. § 134.226

The decision

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

(a) Contents. (1) Following close of record, the Judge will issue a decision containing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the reasons for such findings and conclusions, and any relief ordered. The record will constitute the exclusive basis for a decision.

(2) An OHA decision creates precedent, unless:

(i) Another regulation in this chapter applicable to a specific type of appeal provides that the OHA decision does not create precedent; or

(ii) the decision is designated as one not to be cited as precedent.

(3) A summary decision containing only cursory findings of fact and conclusions of law may be issued only if the Judge finds a full decision will not advance understanding of Federal statutes or applicable regulations, policies, or procedures and the underlying facts and law are of a routine and non-complex nature.

(b) Time limits. Decisions pertaining to the collection of debts owed to SBA and the United States under the Debt Collection Act of 1982, the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, and Part 140 of this chapter must be made within 60 days after a petition is filed. Time limits for decisions in other types of cases, if any, are indicated either in the applicable program regulations or in other subparts of this part 134.

(c) Service. OHA will serve a copy of all written decisions on:

(1) Each party, or, if represented by counsel, on its counsel; and

(2) SBA's General Counsel, or his or her designee, if SBA is not a party.

[61 FR 2683, Jan. 29, 1996, as amended at 67 FR 47249, July 18, 2002; 70 FR 17587, Apr. 7, 2005; 75 FR 47442, Aug. 6, 2010]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2015–2022 · leading case: Precise Systems, Inc. v. United States
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Precise Systems, Inc. v. United States (2015) uscfc “3 13 C.F.R. § 134.226 (a)(2) (2014). The *271 court will also give deference to the OHA’s interpretation of its own precedent, LB & B Assocs.”
Advanced Concepts Enterprises, Inc. v. United States (2019) uscfc · cites it 2× “ACEs argues that OHA’s consideration of amendments made after the record was closed violates 13 C.F.R. § 134.226 which states that the “record will constitute the exclusive 8 Assuming as discussed above that ACEs does have standing, this court does have jurisdiction over ACEs’…”
Veterans Technology LLC v. United States (2018) uscfc “]”); see also 13 C.F.R. § 134.226 (a)(2) (“An [SBA] OHA decision creates precedent unless .”
Superior Optical Labs, Inc. v. United States (2022) uscfc “263, 270 (2015); see 13 C.F.R. § 134.226 (a)(2). In Data Voice, the petitioner applied for consideration under Section 8(a) of the Business Opportunity Development Reform Act of 1988.”
Swift & Staley, Inc. v. United States (2022) uscfc “Further, OHA is required to follow its own precedent, see 13 C.F.R. § 134.226 (a)(2), and the Court defers to “OHA’s interpretation of its own precedent, provided [that] the OHA's interpretation is rational and reasoned[.”
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.