5 U.S.C. § 1305

Administrative law judges

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar

For the purpose of sections 3105, 3344, 4301(2)(D), and 5372 of this title and the provisions of section 5335(a)(B) of this title that relate to administrative law judges, the Office of Personnel Management may, and for the purpose of section 7521 of this title, the Merit Systems Protection Board may investigate, prescribe regulations, appoint advisory committees as necessary, recommend legislation, subpena witnesses and records, and pay witness fees as established for the courts of the United States.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1978–2011 · leading case: Long v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 635 F.3d 526 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
Long v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 635 F.3d 526 (Fed. Cir. 2011). · cites it 3× “We concluded that 5 U.S.C. § 1305 , which states that "for the purpose of section 7521 of this title, the .”
Tunik v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 407 F.3d 1326 (Fed. Cir. 2005). · cites it 3× “5 U.S.C. § 1305 , argues that it is charged with administering section 7521 and that its interpretation is entitled to deference under Chevron U.”
Joseph F. Dugan v. Arch Ramsay, Dir. of the Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 727 F.2d 192 (1st Cir. 1984). “But, court review of a “final agency decision,” to determine whether the agency’s action was lawful, is nonetheless appropriate. II. In reviewing for arbitrariness, we recognize the broad authority that the relevant statutes grant OPM to develop, and to *196 administer, ALJ…”
Brown v. DeBruhl, 468 F. Supp. 513 (D.S.C. 1979). “§ 3105 ], When conducting a hearing under § 5, a hearing examiner is not responsible to or subject to the supervision or direction of employees or agents engaged in the performance of investigative or prosecution functions for the agency.”
Hadigian v. Bd. of Governors, Fed. Reserve Sys., 463 F. Supp. 437 (D.D.C. 1978). “In addition, the statutes on which plaintiff relies, 5 U.S.C. §§ 1305 & 3105 (1976), apply only to situations in which hearings are required under 5 U.”
Friedman v. Devine, 565 F. Supp. 200 (D.D.C. 1982). “Congress has committed broad authority to OPM to determine the qualifications for the position of ALJ, 5 U.S.C. § 1305 , and the regulations empower OPM to rate candidates based upon criteria developed by OPM.”
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.