8 C.F.R. § 274a.9

Enforcement procedures

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

(a) Procedures for the filing of complaints. Any person or entity having knowledge of a violation or potential violation of section 274A of the Act may submit a signed, written complaint in person or by mail to the Service office having jurisdiction over the business or residence of the potential violator. The signed, written complaint must contain sufficient information to identify both the complainant and the potential violator, including their names and addresses. The complaint should also contain detailed factual allegations relating to the potential violation including the date, time and place of the alleged violation and the specific act or conduct alleged to constitute a violation of the Act. Written complaints may be delivered either by mail to the appropriate Service office or by personally appearing before any immigration officer at a Service office.

(b) Investigation. The Service may conduct investigations for violations on its own initiative and without having received a written complaint. When the Service receives a complaint from a third party, it shall investigate only those complaints that have a reasonable probability of validity. If it is determined after investigation that the person or entity has violated section 274A of the Act, the Service may issue and serve a Notice of Intent to Fine or a Warning Notice upon the alleged violator. Service officers shall have reasonable access to examine any relevant evidence of any person or entity being investigated.

(c) Warning notice. The Service and/or the Department of Labor may in their discretion issue a Warning Notice to a person or entity alleged to have violated section 274A of the Act. This Warning Notice will contain a statement of the basis for the violations and the statutory provisions alleged to have been violated.

(d) Notice of Intent to Fine. The proceeding to assess administrative penalties under section 274A of the Act is commenced when the Service issues a Notice of Intent to Fine on Form I-763. Service of this Notice shall be accomplished pursuant to part 103 of this chapter. The person or entity identified in the Notice of Intent to Fine shall be known as the respondent. The Notice of Intent to Fine may be issued by an officer defined in § 242.1 of this chapter with concurrence of a Service attorney.

(1) Contents of the Notice of Intent to Fine. (i) The Notice of Intent to Fine will contain the basis for the charge(s) against the respondent, the statutory provisions alleged to have been violated, and the penalty that will be imposed.

(ii) The Notice of Intent to Fine will provide the following advisals to the respondent:

(A) That the person or entity has the right to representation by counsel of his or her own choice at no expense to the government;

(B) That any statement given may be used against the person or entity;

(C) That the person or entity has the right to request a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 554-557, and that such request must be made within 30 days from the service of the Notice of Intent to Fine;

(D) That the Service will issue a final order in 45 days if a written request for a hearing is not timely received and that there will be no appeal of the final order.

(2) [Reserved]

(e) Request for Hearing Before an Administrative Law Judge. If a respondent contests the issuance of a Notice of Intent to Fine, the respondent must file with the INS, within thirty days of the service of the Notice of Intent to Fine, a written request for a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. Any written request for a hearing submitted in a foreign language must be accompanied by an English language translation. A request for a hearing is not deemed to be filed until received by the Service office designated in the Notice of Intent to Fine. In computing the thirty day period prescribed by this section, the day of service of the Notice of Intent to Fine shall not be included. If the Notice of Intent to Fine was served by ordinary mail, five days shall be added to the prescribed thirty day period. In the request for a hearing, the respondent may, but is not required to, respond to each allegation listed in the Notice of Intent to Fine.

(f) Failure to file a request for hearing. If the respondent does not file a request for a hearing in writing within thirty days of the day of service of the Notice of Intent to Fine (thirty-five days if served by ordinary mail), the INS shall issue a final order from which there is no appeal.

[52 FR 16221, May 1, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 8613, Mar. 16, 1988; 55 FR 25935, June 25, 1990; 56 FR 41786, Aug. 23, 1991; 61 FR 52236, Oct. 7, 1996]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case: Chamber of Com. of United States of Am. v. Whiting, 131 S. Ct. 1968 (2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Chamber of Com. of United States of Am. v. Whiting, 131 S. Ct. 1968 (2011). · cites it 2× “§1324a(e)(1); see also 8 CFR §274a.9 (2010). Upon con cluding that a person has violated IRCA, the Attorney General must provide the person with notice and an op portunity for a hearing before a federal administrative law judge (ALJ).”

Split Rail Fence Co. v. United States, 852 F.3d 1228 (10th Cir. 2017). · cites it 4× “” 1 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(b). ICE’s investigation process typically begins by serving a Notice of Inspection (“NOI”) to the employer.”

Lueleni Maka, Dba Maka's Akamai Serv., & Maka's Akamai Serv. Inc. v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 904 F.2d 1351 (9th Cir. 1990). · cites it 3× “Maka was served with a Notice of Intent to Fine on January 4, 1988, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(c). Maka answered the Notice on February 3, 1988, and requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALT).”

Big Bear Super Mkt. No. 3 v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 913 F.2d 754 (9th Cir. 1990). · cites it 4× “§ 1324a(i)(2) and 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9, including 183 instances in which Big Bear failed to prepare Forms 1-9 for individual employees.”

Buffalo Transp., Inc. v. United States, 844 F.3d 381 (2d Cir. 2016). “Buffalo Transportation contends that it should have been given a Warning Notice pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(c) before receiving the ICE Notice of Intent to Fine.”

New El Rey Sausage Co., Inc. v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 925 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). “”) was inconsistent with 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(i)(2).”

United States v. Van, 931 F.2d 384 (6th Cir. 1991). “§ 1324a(e)(3); 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(c), (d). If the employer is dissatisfied with the administrative decision, he may obtain judicial review.”

Kpmg Peat Marwick of Puerto Rico v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 943 F.2d 91 (1st Cir. 1991). “The INS also points to its regulations, found at 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9 which state as follows: (d) Request for Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge.”

Split Rail Fence Co. v. United States, 844 F.3d 880 (10th Cir. 2016). · cites it 3× “” 1 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(b). ICE’s investigation process typically begins by serving a Notice of Inspection (“NOI”) to the employer.”

Buffalo Transp. Inc. v. United States (2d Cir. 2016). “Buffalo Transportation contends that it should have been given a Warning Notice pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(c) before receiving the ICE Notice of Intent to Fine.”

Walmart, Inc. v. Jean King (11th Cir. 2025). “§ 1324a(e)(3)(A); 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(e). USCA11 Case: 24-11733 Document: 45-1 Date Filed: 07/16/2025 Page: 7 of 70 24-11733 Opinion of the Court 7 Because MSPB members are also removable only for cause under 5 U.”

Enf't of INA Emp. Sanctions Provisions Against Fed. Gov't Entities (OLC 2000). “8 C.F.R. § 274a.9 (1998). An employer served with a NIF may request an evidentiary hearing before an Administrative Law Judge ( “ ALJ” ).”

— 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(b) — 2 cases

Split Rail Fence Co. v. United States, 852 F.3d 1228 (10th Cir. 2017). “” 1 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(b). ICE’s investigation process typically begins by serving a Notice of Inspection (“NOI”) to the employer.”

Split Rail Fence Co. v. United States, 844 F.3d 880 (10th Cir. 2016). “” 1 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(b). ICE’s investigation process typically begins by serving a Notice of Inspection (“NOI”) to the employer.”

— 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(c) — 8 cases

Lueleni Maka, Dba Maka's Akamai Serv., & Maka's Akamai Serv. Inc. v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 904 F.2d 1351 (9th Cir. 1990). “Maka was served with a Notice of Intent to Fine on January 4, 1988, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(c). Maka answered the Notice on February 3, 1988, and requested a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALT).”

New El Rey Sausage Co., Inc. v. U.S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 925 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). “”) was inconsistent with 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(i)(2).”

Big Bear Super Mkt. No. 3 v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 913 F.2d 754 (9th Cir. 1990). “§ 1324a(i)(2) and 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9, including 183 instances in which Big Bear failed to prepare Forms 1-9 for individual employees.”

— 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(d) — 1 case

— 8 C.F.R. § 274a.9(e) — 3 cases

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.