(a) Opportunity to participate. The processing Center will advise the broker of his opportunity to participate in preliminary proceedings with an opportunity to avoid formal proceedings against his license or permit.
(b) Notice of preliminary proceedings. The processing Center will serve upon the broker, in the manner set forth in § 111.63, written notice that:
(1) Transmits a copy of the proposed statement of charges;
(2) Informs the broker that formal proceedings are available to him;
(3) Informs the broker that sections 554 and 558, Title 5, United States Code, will be applicable if formal proceedings are necessary;
(4) Invites the broker to show cause why formal proceedings should not be instituted;
(5) Informs the broker that he may make submissions and demonstrations of the character contemplated by the cited statutory provisions;
(6) Invites any negotiation for settlement of the complaint or charge that the broker deems it desirable to enter into;
(7) Advises the broker of his right to be represented by counsel;
(8) Specifies the place where the broker may respond in writing; and
(9) Advises the broker that the response must be received within 30 calendar days of the date of the notice.
[T.D. 00-17, 65 FR 13891, Mar. 15, 2000, as amended by CBP Dec. 22-21, 87 FR 63319, Oct. 18, 2022]
Notes of Decisions
Urbano v. United States, 967 F. Supp. 1322 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1997).
· cites it 7× “On March 9, 1993, the District Director of Customs in Los Angeles issued to plaintiff a “Notice of Preliminary Proceedings” pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 111.59 , 4 indicating Cus *1326 toms was considering instituting a formal proceeding to revoke plaintiffs customs broker’s license…”
Fusco v. United States Treasury Dep't, 695 F. Supp. 1189 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1988).
· cites it 3× “The preliminary proceedings initiated against plaintiff according to 19 C.F.R. § 111.59 5 fit squarely within section 214 of *1193 th'e 1984 Act.”
Twigger v. Schultz, 484 F.2d 856 (3rd Cir. 1973).
“19 C.F.R. § 111.59 . The District Director then makes a recommendation to the Commissioner, who decides whether to proceed with charges.”
John v. Urbano v. United States, 146 F.3d 1346 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
· cites it 2× “See 19 C.F.R. § 111.59 (1993). Subsequently, on July 5, 1994, the Customs Service initiated what it refers to as “formal proceedings” for license revocation by serving Mr.”
Kazangian v. Brady, 15 Ct. Int'l Trade 488 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1991).
· cites it 2× “”) 28; see 19 C.F.R. § 111.59 (b). On September 19, 1988, Mr.”
Robbins v. Baker, 14 Ct. Int'l Trade 275 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1990).
“Thereafter, plaintiffs were notified of preliminary proceedings in accordance with 19 C.F.R. § 111.59 . In January, 1984, preliminary proceedings were held by the District Director at which time plaintiffs were represented by counsel.”
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.