30 U.S.C. § 816

Judicial review of Commission orders

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 30 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Petition by person adversely affected or aggrieved; temporary relief(1) Any person adversely affected or aggrieved by an order of the Commission issued under this chapter may obtain a review of such order in any United States court of appeals for the circuit in which the violation is alleged to have occurred or in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, by filing in such court within 30 days following the issuance of such order a written petition praying that the order be modified or set aside. A copy of such petition shall be forthwith transmitted by the clerk of the court to the Commission and to the other parties, and thereupon the Commission shall file in the court the record in the proceeding as provided in section 2112 of title 28. Upon such filing, the court shall have exclusive jurisdiction of the proceeding and of the questions determined therein, and shall have the power to make and enter upon the pleadings, testimony, and proceedings set forth in such record a decree affirming, modifying, or setting aside, in whole or in part, the order of the Commission and enforcing the same to the extent that such order is affirmed or modified. No objection that has not been urged before the Commission shall be considered by the court, unless the failure or neglect to urge such objection shall be excused because of extraordinary circumstances. The findings of the Commission with respect to questions of fact, if supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole, shall be conclusive. If any party shall apply to the court for leave to adduce additional evidence and shall show to the satisfaction of the court that such additional evidence is material and that there were reasonable grounds for the failure to adduce such evidence in the hearing before the Commission, the court may order such additional evidence to be taken before the Commission and to be made a part of the record. The Commission may modify its findings as to the facts, or make new findings, by reason of additional evidence so taken and filed, and it shall file such modified or new findings, which findings with respect to questions of fact, if supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole, shall be conclusive. The Commission may modify or set aside its original order by reason of such modified or new findings of fact. Upon the filing of the record after such remand proceedings, the jurisdiction of the court shall be exclusive and its judgment and degree shall be final, except that the same shall be subject to review by the Supreme Court of the United States, as provided in section 1254 of title 28.(2) In the case of a proceeding to review any order or decision issued by the Commission under this chapter, except an order or decision pertaining to an order issued under section 817(a) of this title or an order or decision pertaining to a citation issued under section 814(a) or (f) of this title, the court may, under such conditions as it may prescribe, grant such temporary relief as it deems appropriate pending final determination of the proceeding, if—(A) all parties to the proceeding have been notified and given an opportunity to be heard on a request for temporary relief;(B) the person requesting such relief shows that there is a substantial likelihood that he will prevail on the merits of the final determination of the proceeding; and(C) such relief will not adversely affect the health and safety of miners in the coal or other mine.(3) In the case of a proceeding to review any order or decision issued by the Panel under this chapter, the court may, under such conditions as it may prescribe, grant such temporary relief as it deems appropriate pending final determination of the proceeding, if—(A) all parties to the proceeding have been notified and given an opportunity to be heard on a request for temporary relief; and(B) the person requesting such relief shows that there is a substantial likelihood that he will prevail on the merits of the final determination of the proceeding.(b) Petition by Secretary for review or enforcement of final Commission orders

The Secretary may also obtain review or enforcement of any final order of the Commission by filing a petition for such relief in the United States court of appeals for the circuit in which the alleged violation occurred or in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, and the provisions of subsection (a) shall govern such proceedings to the extent applicable. If no petition for review, as provided in subsection (a), is filed within 30 days after issuance of the Commission’s order, the Commission’s findings of fact and order shall be conclusive in connection with any petition for enforcement which is filed by the Secretary after the expiration of such 30-day period. In any such case, as well as in the case of a noncontested citation or notification by the Secretary which has become a final order of the Commission under subsection (a) or (b) of section 815 of this title, the clerk of the court, unless otherwise ordered by the court, shall forthwith enter a decree enforcing the order and shall transmit a copy of such decree to the Secretary and the operator named in the petition. In any contempt proceeding brought to enforce a decree of a court of appeals entered pursuant to this subsection or subsection (a), the court of appeals may assess the penalties provided in section 820 of this title, in addition to invoking any other available remedies.

The commencement of a proceeding under this section shall not, unless specifically ordered by the court, operate as a stay of the order or decision of the Commission or the Panel.

(Pub. L. 91–173, title I, § 106, Dec. 30, 1969, 83 Stat. 754; Pub. L. 95–164, title II, § 201, Nov. 9, 1977, 91 Stat. 1306; Pub. L. 98–620, title IV, § 402(34), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3360.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsec. (a), was in the original “this Act”, meaning Pub. L. 91–173, Dec. 30, 1969, 83 Stat. 742, known as the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, which is classified principally to this chapter. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 801 of this title and Tables.

Amendments

1984—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 98–620 struck out provision that petitions filed under this subsection had to be heard expeditiously.

1977—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 95–164 added subsec. (a)(1) consisting of a revision of the provisions of former subsecs. (a), (b), (d), and (f) with additions to cover the proceedings in the reviewing court.

Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 95–164 redesignated subsec. (c)(1) as (a)(2) and substituted “issued by the Commission” for “issued by the Secretary” and “under section 817(a) of this title or an order or decision pertaining to a citation issued under section 814(a) or (f) of this title” for “under section 814(a) of this title or an order or decision pertaining to a notice issued under section 814(b) or (i) of this title” in the provisions preceding subpar. (A).

Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 95–164 redesignated subsec. (c)(2) as (a)(3).

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 95–164 added subsec. (b). Provisions of former subsec. (b) were incorporated as revised into subsec. (a)(1).

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 95–164 redesignated subsec. (e) as (c). Former subsec. (c), which consisted of pars. (1) and (2), redesignated (a)(2) and (3).

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 95–164 struck out subsec. (d) and incorporated its provisions, relating to review by the Supreme Court, into subsec. (a)(1).

Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 95–164 redesignated subsec. (e) as (c).

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 95–164 struck out subsec. (f) which related to the appointment of attorneys by the Secretary to represent him in proceedings instituted under this section.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1984 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–620 not applicable to cases pending on Nov. 8, 1984, see section 403 of Pub. L. 98–620, set out as a note under section 1657 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.

Effective Date of 1977 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 95–164 effective 120 days after Nov. 9, 1977, except as otherwise provided, see section 307 of Pub. L. 95–164, set out as a note under section 801 of this title.

Effective Date

Section operative 90 days after Dec. 30, 1969, except to the extent an earlier date is specifically provided for in Pub. L. 91–173, see section 509 of Pub. L. 91–173, set out as a note under section 801 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 212 cases (26 in the last 5 years), 1972–2026 · leading case: Island Creek Coal Co. v. Melyndia Bryan, 937 F.3d 738 (6th Cir. 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Island Creek Coal Co. v. Melyndia Bryan, 937 F.3d 738 (6th Cir. 2019). · cites it 3× “” 30 U.S.C. § 816 (a)(1). An issue-exhaustion mandate (with a built-in exception) could not be stated in plainer terms.”

Gray Fin. Grp., Inc. v. U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 825 F.3d 1236 (11th Cir. 2016). · cites it 4× “At issue there was 30 U.S.C. § 816 (a), the statutory scheme Congress provided for reviewing decisions of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (the “Mine Safety Commission”).”

Cochran v. SEC, 20 F.4th 194 (5th Cir. 2021). · cites it 4× “at 208 (citing 30 U.S.C. § 816 (a)(1)–(2)). Like the SEC in this case, the Department of Labor argued that the Mine Act’s review scheme prevented district courts from exercising subject-matter jurisdiction over pre-final decision challenges to the Mine Act.”

Pendley v. Fed. Mine Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 601 F.3d 417 (6th Cir. 2010). · cites it 8× “30 U.S.C. § 816 (a)(1). 2. The Administrative Law Judge's Order The Secretary of Labor brought three Section 105(c) claims against Highland Mining Co.”

Jones Bros., Inc. v. Sec'y of Labor, 898 F.3d 669 (6th Cir. 2018). · cites it 2× “" 30 U.S.C. § 816 (a)(1). While we are not prepared to say that the nature of Jones Brothers' claim always constitutes an extraordinary circumstance, the absence of legal authority addressing whether the Commission could entertain the claim does.”

Jarkesy v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 803 F.3d 9 (D.C. Cir. 2015). · cites it 7× “771 (quoting the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. § 816 (a)(1)). Finding that the Mine Act thus established a “detailed structure for reviewing violations,” the Supreme Court held, that the scheme implicitly barred district-court jurisdiction over the coal company’s pre-enforcement suit.”

Donovan v. Dewey, 452 U.S. 594 (1981). · cites it 2× “30 U. S. C. § 816 (1976 ed., Supp. III). In this case, the Administrative Law Judge upheld a $1,000 civil penalty proposed by the Secretary.”

Meredith v. Fed. Mine Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 177 F.3d 1042 (D.C. Cir. 1999). · cites it 4× “” 30 U.S.C. § 816 (a)(1). Petitioners find this language significant for two reasons.”

Bennett v. U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n, 844 F.3d 174 (4th Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “30 U.S.C. § 816 (a)(1); see also Thunder Basin, 510 U.”

Cobra Nat. Resources, LLC v. Fed. Mine Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 742 F.3d 82 (4th Cir. 2014). · cites it 4× “30 U.S.C. § 816 . We have held that the statute affords us jurisdiction only over “final” orders from the Commission.”

Knox Creek Coal Corp. v. Sec'y of Labor, 811 F.3d 148 (4th Cir. 2016). · cites it 3× “30 U.S.C. § 816 (a)(1). And we review the Commission’s legal conclusions de novo, affording deference when appropriate to the Secretary’s interpretations.”

Ass'n of Bituminous Contractors v. Andrus, 581 F.2d 853 (D.C. Cir. 1978). · cites it 6× “JURISDICTION OF THE DISTRICT COURT In its suit for declaratory and injunctive relief, the Association is suing essentially to overturn the Board’s decision in Affinity Mining.”

Show all 212 citing cases →

— 30 U.S.C. § 816(a) — 3 cases

Freeman Coal Mining Co., a Div. of Material Serv. Corp. v. Interior Bd. of Mine Operations Appeals, 504 F.2d 741 (7th Cir. 1974).

Rushton Mining Co. v. Rogers C. B. Morton, Sec'y of the Interior, United Mine Workers of Am., Dist. No. 2, Local Union 1520, Intervenor, 520 F.2d 716 (3rd Cir. 1975).

Windsor Coal Co. v. Sec'y of Labor (4th Cir. 1998).

— 30 U.S.C. § 816(a)(1) — 2 cases

Pendley v. Fed. Mine Saf. & Health Review Comm'n, 601 F.3d 417 (6th Cir. 2010). “30 U.S.C. § 816 (a)(1). 2. The Administrative Law Judge's Order The Secretary of Labor brought three Section 105(c) claims against Highland Mining Co.”

Wirtgen Am., Inc. v. United States of Am. (D.D.C. 2020).

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.