5 U.S.C. § 704
Actions reviewable
Agency action made reviewable by statute and final agency action for which there is no other adequate remedy in a court are subject to judicial review. A preliminary, procedural, or intermediate agency action or ruling not directly reviewable is subject to review on the review of the final agency action. Except as otherwise expressly required by statute, agency action otherwise final is final for the purposes of this section whether or not there has been presented or determined an application for a declaratory order, for any form of reconsideration, or, unless the agency otherwise requires by rule and provides that the action meanwhile is inoperative, for an appeal to superior agency authority.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3,614
cases (801 in the last 5 years), 1967–2026 · leading case: U.S. Army Corps of Eng'rs v. Hawkes Co., 136 S. Ct. 1807 (2016).
U.S. Army Corps of Eng'rs v. Hawkes Co., 136 S. Ct. 1807 (2016). “After exhausting administrative remedies, respondents sought review of the approved JD in Federal District Court under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), but the District Court dismissed for want of jurisdiction, hold- ing that the revised JD was not a “final agency action…”
Cuozzo Speed Tech., LLC v. Lee, 195 L. Ed. 2d 423 (2016). “5 U. S. C. §704 . The Patent Office’s decision to initiate inter partes review is “preliminary,” not “final.”
Intl. Refugee Assistance v. Donald J. Trump, 883 F.3d 233 (4th Cir. 2018). “” 5 U.S.C. § 704 . This “omnibus judicial-review provision” allows plaintiffs to sue “for violations of numerous statutes of varying character 7 Used in this way, a “cause of action” also differs from whether a plaintiff has stated a claim sufficient to survive a motion under…”
Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Stand. Oil Co., 449 U.S. 232 (1980). “The Court of Appeals further held that the issuance of the complaint was "final agency action" under § 10 (c) of the APA, 5 U. S. C. § 704 . We granted the Commission's petition for a writ of certiorari because of the importance of the questions raised by Socal's request for…”
Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. United States Dep't of Just., 846 F.3d 1235 (D.C. Cir. 2017). “” 5 U.S.C. § 704 . Appellant filed suit under the APA to compel the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel to meet its disclosure obligations under the “reading-room” provision of the Freedom of Information Act.”
San Francisco Herring Ass'n v. Usdoi, 946 F.3d 564 (9th Cir. 2019). “In a prior appeal, this Court held that the Association had failed to allege any final agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 704 , and directed the district court to dismiss the case.”
Whitman v. Am. Trucking Assns., Inc., 531 U.S. 457 (2001). “We have little trouble concluding that this constitutes final agency action subject to review under § 307.”
Sackett v. Env't Prot. Agency, 132 S. Ct. 1367 (2012). “” 5 U. S. C. §704 . The compliance order here has all the hallmarks of APA finality.”
Impact Energy Resources, LLC v. Salazar, 693 F.3d 1239 (10th Cir. 2012). “§ 226-2 , as it does in the phrase “final agency action” under the APA, 5 U.S.C. § 704 , and that final agency action occurred no later than February 6.”
Bowen v. Massachusetts, 487 U.S. 879 (1988). “*904 In our leading opinion explaining the significance of this provision, Justice Harlan wrote: "The Administrative Procedure Act provides specifically not only for review of `[a]gency action made reviewable by statute' but also for review of `final agency action for which…”
State of Texas v. USA, 809 F.3d 134 (5th Cir. 2015). “” 5 U.S.C. § 704 . Similarly, the disagreement in Massachu- setts v.”
Trudeau v. Fed. Trade Comm'n, 456 F.3d 178 (D.C. Cir. 2006). “The FTC responded with a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), and for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted under Rule 12(b)(6). The district court granted the FTC’s motion to…”
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.