42 C.F.R. § 93.304
Institutional policies and procedures
Institutions seeking an approved research integrity assurance must have written policies and procedures for addressing allegations of research misconduct. Such policies and procedures must:
(a) Address and be consistent with all applicable requirements pertaining to institutional responsibilities included in this part;
(b) Include and be consistent with applicable definitions in this part; and
(c) Provide for all reasonable and practical efforts, if requested and as appropriate, to protect or restore the reputation of persons alleged to have engaged in research misconduct but against whom no finding of research misconduct is made.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2016–2024 · leading case: Anversa v. Partners Healthcare Sys., Inc., 835 F.3d 167 (1st Cir. 2016).
Anversa v. Partners Healthcare Sys., Inc., 835 F.3d 167 (1st Cir. 2016). “” 42 C.F.R. § 93.304 (k). Insofar as the complaint seeks to remedy “[l]ong-term injury to [the plaintiffs’] professional reputations and careers,” the outcome of the institutional investigation and any subsequent action under this provision may reconfigure the contours of the…”
Kumar, ph.D. v. George Washington Univ., 174 F. Supp. 3d 172 (D.D.C. 2016). “See 42 C.F.R. § 93.304 (i) (requiring institutions to “have written policies and procedures for addressing research misconduct that include .”
Pichiorri v. Burghes (S.D. Ohio 2024). “¶ 23; see also 42 C.F.R. § 93.304 .) As such, Ohio State must review and investigate of faculty and staff from various departments within the College of Medicine, including Defendants Arthur Burghes, Brandon Biesidadecki, Jonathan Davis, Jill A.”
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.