C.F.R. » Title 42 » CHAPTER I—PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES › SUBCHAPTER H—HEALTH ASSESSMENTS AND HEALTH EFFECTS STUDIES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES RELEASES AND FACILITIES › PART 93—PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE POLICIES ON RESEARCH MISCONDUCT › Subpart A—General

42 C.F.R. § 93.103

Requirements for findings of research misconduct

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

A finding of research misconduct made under this part requires that:

(a) There be a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community; and

(b) The misconduct be committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly; and

(c) The allegation be proven by a preponderance of the evidence.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2010–2025 · leading case: Yuan v. Johns Hopkins University
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Yuan v. Johns Hopkins University (2017) md · cites it 4× “” 42 C.F.R. § 93.103 . Dr, Yuan also brought claims for conversion and tortious interference with prospective economic advantage.”
Anversa v. Partners Healthcare System, Inc. (2016) ca1 “” 42 C.F.R. § 93.103 . Establishing research misconduct requires a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, of “a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community” that is “committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly.”
Yuan v. Johns Hopkins University (2016) mdctspecapp “” 42 C.F.R. § 93.103 . (a) Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.”
Brodie v. United States Department of Health & Human Services (2011) dcd “42 C.F.R. §§ 93.103 -.104 (emphasis added).”
Braun v. Hhs (2020) cafc · cites it 2× “Such a reading is precluded by § L(1)’s express coverage of re- moval for “scientific misconduct,” which the Board and the parties agree means “research misconduct” as set forth in 42 C.F.R. § 93.103 . 1 J.A. 13; see NIH Intramural Research Program Policies & Procedures for…”
Croce v. Sanders (2020) ohsd · cites it 2× “See generally 42 C.F.R. § 93.103 . Also relevant to this case are the terms “image manipulation” and image or data “duplication.”
Baggett v. Merced Police Dept. (2024) caed “May 11, 2021) (“Although Plaintiff’s Complaint makes no reference to any federal law, the 8 civil cover sheet does invoke 42 C.F.R. § 93.103 . That regulation, however, simply defines 9 “research misconduct” for purposes of policy statements pertaining to the Public Health…”
HOUSER v. FELDMAN (2021) paed “” 42 C.F.R. § 93.103 . A finding of research misconduct requires a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, of “a significant departure from accepted practice of the relevant research community” that was “committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly.”
Flavia Pichiorri v. Arthur Burghes (2025) ca6 “(citing 42 C.F.R. § 93.103 (a)–(c) (2005)). So investigators may not treat an “honest error” as misconduct.”
Croce v. Ohio State Univ. Bd. of Trustees (2023) ohioctcl “OSU’s investigation ultimately concluded with the issuance of a final report that found that Plaintiff did not commit research misconduct as that term is defined in 42 C.F.R. 93.103. Complaint, ¶ 17-18; Plaintiff’s Exhibit 1.”
Bois v. United States Department of Health and Human Services (2012) dcd “” 42 C.F.R. § 93.103 . 7 “Fabrication” involves “making up data or results and recording them,” while “falsification” is “manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the…”
Brodie v. United States Department of Health and Human Services (2011) dcd “42 C.F.R. §§ 93.103 – .104 (emphasis added).”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— 42 C.F.R. § 93.103(d) — 1 case
Yuan v. Johns Hopkins University (2017) md “” 42 C.F.R. § 93.103 . Dr, Yuan also brought claims for conversion and tortious interference with prospective economic advantage.”
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.