28 C.F.R. § 16.25

Final action by the Deputy or Associate Attorney General

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

(a) Unless otherwise indicated, all matters to be referred under § 16.24 by an Assistant Attorney General, the Director of the EOUST, or such person's designees to the Deputy or Associate Attorney General shall be referred (1) to the Deputy Attorney General, if the matter is referred personally by or through the designee of an Assistant Attorney General who is within the general supervision of the Deputy Attorney General, or (2) to the Associate Attorney General, in all other cases.

(b) All other matters to be referred under § 16.24 to the Deputy or Associate Attorney General shall be referred (1) to the Deputy Attorney General, if the originating component is within the supervision of the Deputy Attorney General or is an independent agency that, for administrative purposes, is within the Department of Justice, or (2) to the Associate Attorney General, if the originating component is within the supervision of the Associate Attorney General.

(c) Upon referral, the Deputy or Associate Attorney General shall make the final decision and give notice thereof to the responsible official and such other persons as circumstances may warrant.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1983–2001 · leading case: Andrea Smith Gregory Welsh Larry Hornstein v. James Cromer, 159 F.3d 875 (4th Cir. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Andrea Smith Gregory Welsh Larry Hornstein v. James Cromer, 159 F.3d 875 (4th Cir. 1998). “The dissent states that this procedure is “more elaborate and complicated” than its predecessor.”

Kwan Fai Mak v. The Fed. Bureau of Investigation Dep't of Just. John Ashcroft , Attorney Gen., 252 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir. 2001). “28 C.F.R. § 16.25 . The regulations “provide guidance for the internal operations of the Department of Justice,” and do not create substantive rights.”

Bergman v. United States, 565 F. Supp. 1353 (W.D. Mich. 1983). “Therefore, pursuant to the authority and responsibility delegated to me by the Attorney Gener *1363 al (28 C.F.R. 16.25), I must by copy of this letter, instruct the responsible employees of the Department not to comply with the Order of December 29, 1982.”

United States v. Salemme, 978 F. Supp. 364 (D. Mass. 1997). “Pursuant to the authority vested in him by 28 C.F.R. § 16.25 , the Acting Deputy Attorney General has thus far directed the prosecutors involved in this case not to obey the May 22, 1997 Order requiring them to confirm or deny whether Mercurio, Donati, Guarino and/or St.”

Smith v. Cromer (4th Cir. 1998). “_________________________________________________________________ 1 The dissent states that this procedure is "more elaborate and compli- cated" than its predecessor.”

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.