29 C.F.R. § 580.5
Finality of notice
If the person charged with violations does not, within 15 days after receipt of the notice, take exception to the determination that the violation or violations for which the penalty is imposed occurred, the administrative determination by the Administrator of the amount of such penalty shall be deemed final and not subject to administrative or judicial review. Upon the determination becoming final in such a manner, collection and recovery of the penalty shall be instituted pursuant to § 580.18.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1996–2023 · leading case: Perez v. Paragon Contractors Corp., 340 F. Supp. 3d 1194 (D. Utah 2018).
Perez v. Paragon Contractors Corp., 340 F. Supp. 3d 1194 (D. Utah 2018). “150 at 4; 29 C.F.R. Part 580.5. Docket no. 99 at 8.”
Vaughn v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 627 F. Supp. 2d 738 (E.D. Tex. 2007). “29 C.F.R. § 580.5 (e)(3). In any event, the court has determined that it will issue a declaratory judgment in connection with the dismissal of this case to the effect that the allegations in this case do not confer upon settlement class members an obligation to make the required…”
Acura of Bellevue v. Reich, 90 F.3d 1403 (9th Cir. 1996). “The regulation defining “Finality of Notice” is contained in 29 C.F.R. § 580.5 , which provides: If the person charged with violation does not, within 15 days after receipt of the notice, take exception to the determination that the violation or violations for which the penalty…”
United States Dep't of Labor v. Los Cocos Mexican Restaurant, Inc. (D. Kan. 2022). “) Defendants did not file an exception to the finding within 15 days (or thereafter), which according to Plaintiff makes the finding “final and not subject to administrative or judicial review” pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 580.5 and 29 U.S.C. § 216 (e)(4).”
United States Dep't of Labor v. Los Cocos Mexican Restaurant, Inc. (D. Kan. 2022). “They had fifteen days thereafter under § 216(e)(4) to file an exception, but did not do so, making the determination “final and not subject to administrative or judicial review” under 29 C.F.R. § 580.5 . (Id. at 6.) The complaint seeks permanent injunctive relief restraining…”
United States Dep't of Labor v. Los Cocos Mexican Restaurant, Inc. (D. Kan. 2023). “In this case, there are such agency rules, as 29 C.F.R. § 580.5 requires an appeal before judicial review and 29 C.”
Hugler v. Evolution Quality Guard Inc. (D.P.R. 2020). “§ 216 (e)(4), 29 C.F.R. § 580.5 . The Court also concludes that the Secretary has shown entitlement to the amount claimed in civil penalties ($226,442.”
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.