(a) In rendering its decision, the Commission will adopt, modify, or set aside the recommended findings, recommended conclusions, and proposed rule or order contained in the recommended decision, and will include in the decision a statement of the reasons or basis for its action and any concurring and dissenting opinions.
(b) In those cases where the Commission believes that it should have further information or additional views of the parties as to the form and content of the rule or order to be issued, the Commission, in its discretion, may withhold final action pending the receipt of such additional information or views.
(c) The order of the Commission disposing of adjudicative hearings under the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act will be published in the Federal Register and, if it contains a rule or regulation, will specify the effective date thereof, which will not be prior to the ninetieth (90th) day after its publication unless the Commission finds that emergency conditions exist necessitating an earlier effective date, in which event the Commission will specify in the order its findings as to such conditions.
[32 FR 8449, June 13, 1967, as amended at 88 FR 42877, July 5, 2023]
Notes of Decisions
Axon Enter., Inc. v. FTC, 598 U.S. 175 (2023).
“See 16 CFR § 3.54 ; 17 CFR § 201.411 (a). Or if no such review has occurred, the ALJ's ruling itself becomes the decision of the Commission.”
Chrysler Corp. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 561 F.2d 357 (D.C. Cir. 1977).
“It is clear, however, that under both the Administrative Procedure Act and respondent’s regulations, the Commission may exercise, on appeal from an initial decision by an administrative law judge, all powers which it would possess if it made the initial decision itself.”
ECM BioFilms, Inc. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 851 F.3d 599 (6th Cir. 2017).
“1977); see 16 C.F.R. § 3.54 (a). The Commission explained its departure from the ALJ’s findings regarding the survey results, and thus the record does not support the conclusion that the Commission’s decision “fail[s] to *613 reflect attentive consideration to the [ALJ’s]…”
Rambus, Inc. v. Infineon Tech. AG, 222 F.R.D. 101 (E.D. Va. 2004).
· cites it 2× “” 16 C.F.R. § 3.54 (b). Thus, the Initial Decision is not, under the FTC’s own rules, a final determination of the FTC’s findings.”
Atl. Richfield Co. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 398 F. Supp. 1 (S.D. Tex. 1975).
· cites it 2× “16 C.F.R. § 3.54 . Additionally, the rules provide for an interlocutory appeal of a decision by the Administrative Law Judge prior to the time of the hearing.”
Impax Lab v. FTC, 994 F.3d 484 (5th Cir. 2021).
“Reviewing both the facts and law de novo, 16 C.F.R. § 3.54 (a), the Commission reached a different conclusion.”
Axon Enter., Inc. v. FTC, 598 U.S. 175 (2023).
“See 16 CFR §3.54 ; 17 CFR §201.411 (a). Or if no such review has occurred, the ALJ’s ruling itself becomes the decision of the Commission.”
Stand. Oil Co. v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 475 F. Supp. 1261 (N.D. Ind. 1979).
“16 C.F.R. § 3.54 . Additionally, the rules provide for an interlocutory appeal of a decision by the Administrative Law Judge prior to the time of the hearing.”
— 16 C.F.R. § 3.54(b) — 1 case
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.