C.F.R. » Title 21 » CHAPTER I—FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES › SUBCHAPTER E—ANIMAL DRUGS, FEEDS, AND RELATED PRODUCTS › PART 514—NEW ANIMAL DRUG APPLICATIONS › Subpart C—Hearing Procedures

21 C.F.R. § 514.200

Notice of opportunity for hearing; notice of participation and requests for hearing; grant or denial of hearing

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

(a) The notice to the applicant of opportunity for a hearing on a proposal by the Commissioner to refuse to approve an application or to withdraw the approval of an application will be published in the Federal Register together with an explanation of the grounds for the proposed action. The notice will describe how to request a hearing. An applicant has 30 days after publication of the notice to request a hearing.

(b) If the applicant fails to request a hearing within the 30-day timeframe, the Commissioner, without further notice, will publish a final order denying or withdrawing approval of the application.

(c) If the applicant desires to request a hearing:

(1) Within 30 days after publication of the notice of opportunity for hearing, the applicant must submit to the Dockets Management Staff written objections and a request for a hearing in accordance with §§ 12.20 and 12.22. This request for a hearing must include each specific objection to the proposal on which a hearing is requested, together with a detailed description and analysis of the factual information (including all relevant clinical and other investigational data) the applicant will present in support of that objection. A request for a hearing may not rest upon mere allegations or denials or general descriptions of positions or contentions, but must set forth specific reliable evidence showing there is a genuine and substantial issue of fact that requires a hearing.

(2) If the Commissioner determines upon review of the data and information submitted in the objections and request for a hearing that a hearing is not justified because no genuine and substantial issue of fact precludes the refusal to approve the application or the withdrawal of approval of the application (for example, the applicant has not identified any adequate and well-controlled clinical investigations to support the claims of effectiveness), the Commissioner will enter an order denying the hearing and stating the final findings and conclusions.

(3) If the Commissioner determines upon review of the data and information submitted in the objections and request for a hearing that a hearing is justified, the Commissioner will publish a notice setting forth the following:

(i) The regulation or order that is the subject of the hearing;

(ii) A statement specifying any part of the regulation or order that has been stayed by operation of law or in the Commissioner's discretion;

(iii) The parties to the hearing;

(iv) The specific issues of fact for resolution at the hearing;

(v) The presiding officer, or a statement that the presiding officer will be designated in a later notice; and

(vi) The date, time, and place of the prehearing conference, or a statement that the date, time, and place will be announced in a later notice. However, in the case of a denial of approval, the hearing must not occur more than 90 days after expiration of the 30-day time period in which to request a hearing, unless the presiding officer and the applicant otherwise agree; and in the case of withdrawal of approval, the hearing will occur as soon as practicable.

(d) The hearing will be open to the public; however, if the Commissioner finds that portions of the application which serve as a basis for the hearing contain information concerning a method or process entitled to protection as a trade secret, the part of the hearing involving such portions will not be public, unless the respondent so specifies in the request for a hearing.

[81 FR 52997, Aug. 11, 2016, as amended 88 FR 45066, July 14, 2023]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1978–2024 · leading case: Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. United States Food & Drug Administration
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. United States Food & Drug Administration (2012) nysd · cites it 4× “If a NADA/ANADA applicant requests a hearing, he must submit, in writing, an explanation of why the NADA/ANADA “should not be withdrawn, together with a well-organized and full-factual analysis of the clinical and other investigational data he is prepared to prove in support of…”
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. United States Food & Drug Administration (2014) ca2 · cites it 2× “The government next points to 21 C.F.R. § 514.200 (c), which sets out the possible responses a sponsor may make to an NOOH, and describes the requisite showing a sponsor must make to secure an actual hearing as opposed to a decision on the papers.”
American Cyanamid Company v. Food and Drug Administration and Joseph A. Califano, Secretary of Health, Education and Wel (1979) cadc · cites it 2× “21 C.F.R. § 514.200 (a) (1978) provides: The notice to the applicant of opportunity for a hearing on a proposal by the Commissioner to refuse to approve an application or to withdraw the approval of an application will specify the grounds upon which he proposes to issue his…”
Masti-Kure Products Co. v. Califano (1978) cadc “See 21 C.F.R. § 514.200 (1977): (a) The notice to the applicant of opportunity for a hearing on a proposal by the Commissioner to refuse to approve an application or to withdraw the approval of an application will specify the grounds upon which he proposes to issue his order.”
American Cyanamid Co. v. Young (1985) cadc “” See 21 C.F.R. § 514.200 (c) (1978). This court “recognized a rather broad area” in which the FDA may properly pluck out meritless applications, American Cyanamid, 606 F.”
NRDC v. US FDA (2014) ca2 · cites it 2× “The government next points to 21 C.F.R. § 514.200 (c), which sets out the possible responses a sponsor may make to an NOOH, and describes the requisite showing a sponsor must make to secure an actual hearing as opposed to a decision on the papers.”
Phibro Animal Health Corporation v. Califf (2024) dcd “” 21 C.F.R. § 514.200 (c)(1). 2 After reviewing “the data and information submitted in the objections and request for a hearing,” § 514.”
— 21 C.F.R. § 514.200(c) — 1 case
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. United States Food & Drug Administration (2012) nysd “If a NADA/ANADA applicant requests a hearing, he must submit, in writing, an explanation of why the NADA/ANADA “should not be withdrawn, together with a well-organized and full-factual analysis of the clinical and other investigational data he is prepared to prove in support of…”
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.