42 C.F.R. § 93.500

General policy

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

(a) This subpart provides a respondent an opportunity to contest ORI findings of research misconduct and/or proposed HHS administrative actions included in a charge letter.

(b) A respondent may contest ORI's research misconduct findings and proposed HHS administrative actions by filing a notice of appeal with an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) at the DAB.

(c) Based on the administrative record, the ALJ shall rule on whether ORI's research misconduct findings and any proposed HHS administrative actions are reasonable and not based on a material error of law or fact. The ALJ's ruling constitutes a recommended decision to the Assistant Secretary for Health (ASH) in accordance with § 93.511(b).

(d) A respondent must exhaust all available administrative remedies under this subpart before seeking judicial review of ORI's findings and/or HHS administrative actions. The contested findings and/or administrative actions shall be inoperative while the respondent is pursuing administrative remedies under this subpart.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2012–2013 · leading case: Mauvis-Jarvis v. Wong
Mauvis-Jarvis v. Wong (2013) illappct · cites it 2× “42 C.F.R. §§ 93.500 to 93.501 (2005). The parties to the hearing are only the respondent and the ORI, and not the institution where the research misconduct proceedings were initiated.”
Bois v. United States Department of Health and Human Services (2012) dcd · cites it 3× “Bois also challenges the ALJ’s statement in the Amended Decision that a dismissal of a hearing request is not a ruling on the merits that, under 42 C.F.R. §93.500 (c), would be subject to review by the Assistant Secretary for Health in accordance with §93.”
— 42 C.F.R. § 93.500(c) — 1 case
Bois v. United States Department of Health and Human Services (2012) dcd “Bois also challenges the ALJ’s statement in the Amended Decision that a dismissal of a hearing request is not a ruling on the merits that, under 42 C.F.R. §93.500 (c), would be subject to review by the Assistant Secretary for Health in accordance with §93.”
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.