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 E—Opportunity To Contest ORI Findings of Research Misconduct and Proposed HHS Administrative Actions

42 C.F.R. § 93.503

Filing of the administrative record

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

(a) For appeals that are not dismissed under § 93.502(a), ORI will file the administrative record for the appeal.

(b) The ALJ's review will be based on the administrative record.

(c) The parties have no right to supplement the administrative record.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2008–2012 · leading case: Brodie v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 715 F. Supp. 2d 74 (D.D.C. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Brodie v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 715 F. Supp. 2d 74 (D.D.C. 2010). “at 10 (quoting 42 C.F.R. § 93.503 ). These arguments are unconvincing in light of another HHS regulation that expressly provides for summary disposition where there are no genuine factual disputes and in light of the ALJ’s explicit finding that there was no “genuine dispute over…”
Uzelmeier v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 541 F. Supp. 2d 241 (D.D.C. 2008). “” 42 C.F.R. § 93.503 (a). The ALJ concluded, after reviewing and addressing the points made and repeated throughout plaintiffs 200-page request for a hearing, that plaintiffs “general denials and assertions of error are not sufficient to establish a genuine dispute.”
Bois v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs. (D.D.C. 2012). · cites it 2× “”) Moreover, while ultimately the Court found that Singleton’s claim that he did not understand a question on the pilot’s application was “not inherently implausible,” and it remanded the case for a hearing on whether his answer to the question was intentionally false, that case…”
Brodie v. United States Dep't of Health & Human Servs. (D.D.C. 2010). “at 10 (quoting 42 C.F.R. § 93.503 ). These arguments are unconvincing in light of another HHS regulation that expressly provides for summary disposition where there are no genuine factual disputes and in light of the ALJ’s explicit finding that there was no “genuine dispute over…”
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.