C.F.R. » Title 16 » CHAPTER I—FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION › SUBCHAPTER A—ORGANIZATION, PROCEDURES AND RULES OF PRACTICE › PART 3—RULES OF PRACTICE FOR ADJUDICATIVE PROCEEDINGS › Subpart A—Scope of Rules; Nature of Adjudicative Proceedings

16 C.F.R. § 3.2

Nature of adjudicative proceedings

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

Adjudicative proceedings are those formal proceedings conducted under one or more of the statutes administered by the Commission which are required by statute to be determined on the record after opportunity for an agency hearing. The term includes hearings upon objections to orders relating to the promulgation, amendment, or repeal of rules under sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act, but does not include rulemaking proceedings up to the time when the Commission determines under § 1.26(g) of this chapter that objections sufficient to warrant the holding of a public hearing have been filed. The term also includes proceedings for the assessment of civil penalties pursuant to § 1.94 of this chapter. The term does not include other proceedings such as negotiations for and Commission consideration of the entry of consent orders; investigational hearings as distinguished from proceedings after the issuance of a complaint; requests for extensions of time to comply with final orders or other proceedings involving compliance with final orders; proceedings for the promulgation of industry guides or trade regulation rules; or the promulgation of substantive rules and regulations.

[74 FR 1820, Jan. 13, 2009]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1969–2008 · leading case: Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Compagnie De Saint-Gobain-Pont-A-Mousson, 636 F.2d 1300 (D.C. Cir. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Compagnie De Saint-Gobain-Pont-A-Mousson, 636 F.2d 1300 (D.C. Cir. 1980). “Formal FTC adjudicative proceedings are governed by Part 3 of the FTC Rules of Practice, 16 C.F.R. §§ 3.2 et seq. (1978). . See 15 U.”
Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. N.V. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 534 F.3d 410 (5th Cir. 2008). “See 16 C.F.R. §§ 3.2 , 3.11; see also Genuine Parts Co.”
Action on Saf. & Health v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 498 F.2d 757 (D.C. Cir. 1974). · cites it 2× “45(b) (1970) 10 16 C.F.R. 3.2 (1973) 11 5 U.S.C. 554(c) (1970) provides: (c) The agency shall give all interested parties opportunity for-- (1) the submission and consideration of facts, arguments, offers of settlement, or proposals of adjustment when time, the nature of the…”
Bristol-Myers Co. v. The Fed. Trade Comm'n, 469 F.2d 1116 (2d Cir. 1972). “2 of its Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Proceedings, 16 C.F.R. § 3.2 , which provides in pertinent part: “Adjudicative proceedings are those formal proceedings conducted under one or more of the statutes administered by the Commission which are required by statute to be…”
Atl. Richfield Co. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 398 F. Supp. 1 (S.D. Tex. 1975). “16 C.F.R. § 3.2 ; 15 U.S.C. § 45 (b). 2 .”
Dr Pepper/Seven-Up Companies, Inc. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 798 F. Supp. 762 (D.D.C. 1992). · cites it 2× “First, plaintiffs contend that the consideration and denial of the application constituted *773 agency adjudication, thereby triggering the full panoply of trial-type procedures set forth in the Commission’s “Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Proceedings,” 16 C.F.R. § 3.2 et…”
United States v. Papercraft Corp., 393 F. Supp. 408 (W.D. Pa. 1975). · cites it 2× “d] ALLEGED COMMISSION ERRORS IN HANDLING PAPERCRAFT’S REQUESTS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME Papercraft argues that the Commission’s failure to “provid [e] an articulated reasoned basis” for its denial of Papercraft’s request for extension of the divestiture deadline violated the…”
George T. Robertson & Samuel E. Southerland v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 415 F.2d 49 (4th Cir. 1969). “61 ] and expressly provide that these proceedings are not adjudicative [ 16 C.F.R. § 3.2 ]. Neither the Federal Trade Commission Act nor the Commission’s rules require formal hearings at the compliance stage.”
Chicago Bridge & Iron Co., NV v. FTC, 515 F.3d 447 (5th Cir. 2008). “See 16 C.F.R. §§ 3.2 , 3.11; see also Genuine Parts Co.”
Chicago Bridge & Iron Co. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 515 F.3d 447 (5th Cir. 2008). “See 16 C.F.R. §§ 3.2 , 3.11; see also Genuine Parts Co.”
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.