21 U.S.C. § 676

Violations

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 21 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Misdemeanors; felonies: intent to defraud and distribution of adulterated articles; good faith

Any person, firm, or corporation who violates any provision of this chapter for which no other criminal penalty is provided by this chapter shall upon conviction be subject to imprisonment for not more than one year, or a fine of not more than $1,000, or both such imprisonment and fine; but if such violation involves intent to defraud, or any distribution or attempted distribution of an article that is adulterated (except as defined in section 601(m)(8) of this title), such person, firm, or corporation shall be subject to imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine of not more than $10,000, or both: Provided, That no person, firm, or corporation, shall be subject to penalties under this section for receiving for transportation any article or animal in violation of this chapter if such receipt was made in good faith, unless such person, firm, or corporation refuses to furnish on request of a representative of the Secretary the name and address of the person from whom he received such article or animal, and copies of all documents, if any there be, pertaining to the delivery of the article or animal to him.

(b) Minor violations; written notice of warning of criminal and civil proceedings

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as requiring the Secretary to report for prosecution or for the institution of libel or injunction proceedings, minor violations of this chapter whenever he believes that the public interest will be adequately served by a suitable written notice of warning.

(Mar. 4, 1907, ch. 2907, title IV, § 406, as added Pub. L. 90–201, § 16, Dec. 15, 1967, 81 Stat. 599; amended Pub. L. 99–641, title IV, § 403(c), Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3570.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1986—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 99–641, § 403(c)(1), temporarily inserted provisions which related to factors required to be considered by Secretary in determining whether public interest is served by written notice of warning. See Effective and Termination Dates of 1986 Amendment note below.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 99–641, § 403(c)(2), temporarily added subsec. (c). See Effective and Termination Dates of 1986 Amendment note below.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective and Termination Dates of 1986 Amendment

Pub. L. 99–641, title IV, § 403(c), Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3570, provided that the amendment made by that section is effective only during the 6-year period beginning Nov. 10, 1986.

Construction and Effect of Amendments by Pub. L. 99–641

For provisions relating to construction and effect of temporary amendments by section 403 of Pub. L. 99–641, see sections 403(e) and 404 of Pub. L. 99–641, set out as notes entitled “Inspection Services for Establishments Not Participating in Total Plant Quality-Control Program” and “Savings Provision”, respectively, under section 609 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases, 1971–2019 · leading case: Rickey I. Kanter v. William P. Barr, 919 F.3d 437 (7th Cir. 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Rickey I. Kanter v. William P. Barr, 919 F.3d 437 (7th Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “, 21 U.S.C. § 676 (violating the Federal Meat Inspection Act in certain ways); 18 U.”

United States v. Kent J. Brummels, 15 F.3d 769 (8th Cir. 1994). · cites it 5× “Brummels appeals the district court’s 1 determination that the conduct to which he pleaded guilty qualified as a felony under 21 U.S.C. § 676 (a) (1988). Because we hold that the district court’s factual determination that Brummels had substantive quality-control duties in his…”

United States v. Joann Mitcheltree, 940 F.2d 1329 (10th Cir. 1991). · cites it 2× “We also noted the correspondence between the Federal Meat Inspection Act provision at issue, 21 U.S.C. § 676 (a), and the provision of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) at issue in this case, 21 U.”

United States v. Rudolph George Stanko, 491 F.3d 408 (8th Cir. 2007). “See 21 U.S.C. § 676 (a) (any violation of any provision of the FMIA subjects a person to imprisonment "for not more than one year, or a fine of not more than $1,000, or both such imprisonment and fine; but if such violation involves intent to defraud .”

United States v. Jack Watkins, United States of Am. v. Cap Tab Nutritional Formulating & Mfg. Inc., 278 F.3d 961 (9th Cir. 2002). “” See 21 U.S.C. § 676 (a). There, the court looked no further than the literal words of the statute and held that “the statutory language does not require that the false or misleading statements be ‘material.”

United States v. Alan S. Agnew, 931 F.2d 1397 (10th Cir. 1991). “C Appellant raises for the first time on this appeal the contention that the felony provision set out at 21 U.S.C. § 676 is unconstitutionally vague as applied; hence, if this contention is to be considered at all, the usual standard for review would be plain error.”

United States v. Charles M. Contris, 592 F.2d 893 (5th Cir. 1979). “21 U.S.C.A. § 676 (a). . All equine carcasses and meat and other parts thereof shall be marked to show the kinds of animals from which they were derived, before the products are sold, transported, offered for sale or transportation, or received for transportation in commerce.”

Harrison Wellford v. Clifford L. Hardin, Individually, & as Sec'y of Agric., 444 F.2d 21 (4th Cir. 1971). “” 21 U.S.C. § 676 (b) (Supp. III, 1967). The Federal Meat Inspection Act and the Poultry Products *23 Inspection Act also authorize the Secretary or his representative to detain for a period of up to 20 days any meat or poultry product which he has reason to believe is…”

United States v. Hiland, 909 F.2d 1114 (8th Cir. 1990). “In affirming a felony conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 676 (a), a provision of the Federal Meat Inspection Act very similar to § 333(a)(2), the Cattle King court found no reversible error in the giving of a “responsible relationship” instruction nearly identical to the one upheld in…”

United States v. Cammisano, 413 F. Supp. 886 (W.D. Mo. 1976). “See 21 U.S.C. § 676 (b). The government’s refusal to comply with this Court’s order of May 10, 1976, leaves us in the dark in regard to whether the Department of Agriculture has promulgated any controlling criteria for determining whether a violation may be classified as “major”…”

United States v. 2,116 Boxes of Boned Beef, 516 F. Supp. 321 (D. Kan. 1981). “The Secretary is not required to bring a condemnation action when adulteration is only suspected; 21 U.S.C. § 676 (b) states, “Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as requiring a Secretary to report for prosecution or for the institution of libel or injunction proceedings,…”

Levine v. Conner, 540 F. Supp. 2d 1113 (N.D. Cal. 2008). “; 21 U.S.C. § 676 . On September 28, 2005 the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service issued a notice entitled “Treatment of Live Poultry Before Slaughter.”

Show all 15 citing 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.