27 C.F.R. § 555.79

Appeal on petition to the Director

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

An appeal to the Director is not required prior to filing an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for judicial review. An appeal may be taken by the applicant, licensee, or permittee to the Director from a decision resulting from a hearing under § 555.73 or § 555.75. An appeal may also be taken by a Director, Industry Operations from a decision resulting from a hearing under § 555.75 as provided in § 555.76(b). The appeal shall be taken by filing a petition for review on appeal with the Director within 15 days of the service of an administrative law judge's decision or an order. The petition will set forth facts tending to show action of an arbitrary nature, action without reasonable warrant in fact, or action contrary to law and regulations. A copy of the petition will be filed with the Director, Industry Operations or served on the applicant, licensee, or permittee, as the case may be. In the event of appeal, the Director, Industry Operations shall immediately forward the complete original record, by certified mail, to the Director for his consideration, review, and disposition as provided in subpart I of part 771 of this chapter. When, on appeal, the Director affirms the initial decision of the Director, Industry Operations or the administrative law judge, as the case may be, the initial decision will be final.

[T.D. ATF-87, 46 FR 40384, Aug. 7, 1981, as amended by ATF 2013R-9F, 79 FR 46694, Aug. 11, 2014; ATF 33F, 84 FR 64744, Nov. 25, 2019]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2008–2023 · leading case: Vineland Fireworks Co. v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives, 544 F.3d 509 (3rd Cir. 2008).
Vineland Fireworks Co. v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives, 544 F.3d 509 (3rd Cir. 2008). · cites it 14× “We review an agency's decision to apply a particular standard of review to determine if it was "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law." 5 U.S.C. § 706 (2)(A); see also Chen v.”
Vineland Fireworks v. Bur Alcohol Tobacco (3rd Cir. 2008). · cites it 6× “Vineland argues that the Director did not limit his review of the ALJ’s decision to a determination of whether it was “arbitrary and capricious,” and he should have so limited his standard of review pursuant to 27 C.F.R. § 555.79 . We review an agency’s decision to apply a…”
D.C v. Imports, L.L.C. v. ATF (7th Cir. 2016). “See 27 C.F.R. § 555.79 . DCV Imports peti- tioned for review by this court.”
Firestorm Pyrotechnics v. Dettelbach, 61 F.4th 768 (10th Cir. 2023). “76 (b) (2023), and Firestorm timely appealed to the Director of the ATF, see 27 C.F.R. § 555.79 (2023).5 In its appeal to the Director, Firestorm challenged the ALJ’s finding of willfulness and claimed the government had denied the company an opportunity to comply with the…”
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.