7 U.S.C. § 136k

Stop sale, use, removal, and seizure

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 7 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Stop sale, etc., orders

Whenever any pesticide or device is found by the Administrator in any State and there is reason to believe on the basis of inspection or tests that such pesticide or device is in violation of any of the provisions of this subchapter, or that such pesticide or device has been or is intended to be distributed or sold in violation of any such provisions, or when the registration of the pesticide has been canceled by a final order or has been suspended, the Administrator may issue a written or printed “stop sale, use, or removal” order to any person who owns, controls, or has custody of such pesticide or device, and after receipt of such order no person shall sell, use, or remove the pesticide or device described in the order except in accordance with the provisions of the order.

(b) SeizureAny pesticide or device that is being transported or, having been transported, remains unsold or in original unbroken packages, or that is sold or offered for sale in any State, or that is imported from a foreign country, shall be liable to be proceeded against in any district court in the district where it is found and seized for confiscation by a process in rem for condemnation if—(1) in the case of a pesticide—(A) it is adulterated or misbranded;(B) it is not registered pursuant to the provisions of section 136a of this title;(C) its labeling fails to bear the information required by this subchapter;(D) it is not colored or discolored and such coloring or discoloring is required under this subchapter; or(E) any of the claims made for it or any of the directions for its use differ in substance from the representations made in connection with its registration;(2) in the case of a device, it is misbranded; or(3) in the case of a pesticide or device, when used in accordance with the requirements imposed under this subchapter and as directed by the labeling, it nevertheless causes unreasonable adverse effects on the environment.In the case of a plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant, used in accordance with the label claims and recommendations, physical or physiological effects on plants or parts thereof shall not be deemed to be injury, when such effects are the purpose for which the plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant was applied.(c) Disposition after condemnation

If the pesticide or device is condemned it shall, after entry of the decree, be disposed of by destruction or sale as the court may direct and the proceeds, if sold, less the court costs, shall be paid into the Treasury of the United States, but the pesticide or device shall not be sold contrary to the provisions of this subchapter or the laws of the jurisdiction in which it is sold. On payment of the costs of the condemnation proceedings and the execution and delivery of a good and sufficient bond conditioned that the pesticide or device shall not be sold or otherwise disposed of contrary to the provisions of the subchapter or the laws of any jurisdiction in which sold, the court may direct that such pesticide or device be delivered to the owner thereof. The proceedings of such condemnation cases shall conform, as near as may be to the proceedings in admiralty, except that either party may demand trial by jury of any issue of fact joined in any case, and all such proceedings shall be at the suit of and in the name of the United States.

(d) Court costs, etc.

When a decree of condemnation is entered against the pesticide or device, court costs and fees, storage, and other proper expenses shall be awarded against the person, if any, intervening as claimant of the pesticide or device.

(June 25, 1947, ch. 125, § 13, as added Pub. L. 92–516, § 2, Oct. 21, 1972, 86 Stat. 991; amended Pub. L. 100–532, title VIII, § 801(h), Oct. 25, 1988, 102 Stat. 2682.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

A prior section 13 of act June 25, 1947, was classified to section 135k of this title prior to amendment of act June 25, 1947, by Pub. L. 92–516.

Amendments

1988—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 100–532, § 801(h)(1), directed that sentence beginning “In the case of” be moved from par. (3) and become a full measure sentence after par. (3).

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 100–532, § 801(h)(2), substituted “sold. On” for “sold: Provided, That upon”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1988 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–532 effective on expiration of 60 days after Oct. 25, 1988, see section 901 of Pub. L. 100–532, set out as a note under section 136 of this title.

Effective Date

For effective date of section, see section 4 of Pub. L. 92–516, set out as a note under section 136 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1985–2024 · leading case: Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC, 544 U.S. 431 (2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC, 544 U.S. 431 (2005). · cites it 2× “To mention only a few examples, the label must contain the name and address of the producer, the product registration number, and an ingredient statement.”

Arnold v. Dow Chem. Co., 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7082 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001). “(7 U.S.C. § 136k(a), (b).) In addition, civil and criminal penalties may be imposed.”

In Re Harry Javens & Joyce Javens, Debtors. Harry Javens & Joyce Javens v. City of Hazel Park & City of Royal Oak, 107 F.3d 359 (6th Cir. 1997). “, 7 U.S.C. § 136k(b) (authorizing in rem proceedings to seize adulterated or mislabeled pesticides); 15 U.”

Reckitt Benckiser, Inc. v. Jackson, 762 F. Supp. 2d 34 (D.D.C. 2011). · cites it 4× “…pesticides) (FIFRA § 4); § 136d (Administrative review; suspension) (FIFRA § 6); § 136j (Unlawful acts) (FIFRA § 12); 7 U.S.C. § 136k (Stop sale, use, removal, and seizure) (FI- *36 FRA § 13); and § 136i (Penalties) (FI-FRA § 14). A. Registration (7 U.S.C. § 136a) FIFRA…”

In Re DuPont-Benlate Litig., 859 F. Supp. 619 (D.P.R. 1994). “7 U.S.C. § 136k. A stop sale order was issued in connection with the alleged atrazine contamination of Ben-late.”

Eli Lilly & Co. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 615 F. Supp. 811 (S.D. Ind. 1985). “§ 136d(b) (under appropriate circumstances the EPA may cancel or change the classification of a pesticide’s registration); 7 U.S.C. § 136k (EPA may issue “stop sale, use, removal, and seizure” orders when it has reason to believe that a pesticide is in violation of a FIFRA…”

Turner v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 848 F. Supp. 711 (S.D. Miss. 1994). · cites it 2× “See 7 U.S.C. § 136k. These same factual assertions support the State’s Motion to Dismiss.”

Ciba-Geigy Corp. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 607 F. Supp. 1467 (D.D.C. 1985). · cites it 2× “Any of these procedures would provide Ciba-Geigy an opportunity for a hearing on the validity of EPA’s position and the merits of the misbranding determination.”

Almond Hill Sch. v. United States Dep't of Agric., 768 F.2d 1030 (9th Cir. 1985). · cites it 2× “7 U.S.C. § 136k(a). 5 The Administrator may also seize and condemn pesticides that are misbranded or mislabeled.”

United States v. EBay, Inc. (E.D.N.Y 2024). · cites it 2× “7 U.S.C. § 136k.” Compl. ¶ 82. If someone receives an SSURO, they cannot “sell, use, or remove the pesticide or device described in the order except in accordance with the provisions of the order.”

Reckitt Benckiser Inc. v. Jackson (D.D.C. 2011). · cites it 3× “…pesticides) (FIFRA § 4); § 136d (Administrative review; suspension) (FIFRA § 6); § 136j (Unlawful acts) (FIFRA § 12); 7 U.S.C. § 136k (Stop sale, use, removal, and seizure) (FIFRA § 13); and § 136l (Penalties) (FIFRA § 14). A. Registration (7 U.S.C. § 136a) FIFRA requires that…”

Am. Vanguard Corp. v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2019). “7 U.S.C. § 136k(a). Such orders are to be issued only where the EPA has reason to believe that there is a potential hazard to human health or the environment or to address serious violations that present a threat of harm.”

Show all 13 citing cases →

— 7 U.S.C. § 136k(a) — 9 cases

Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC, 544 U.S. 431 (2005). “To mention only a few examples, the label must contain the name and address of the producer, the product registration number, and an ingredient statement.”

Arnold v. Dow Chem. Co., 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7082 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001). “(7 U.S.C. § 136k(a), (b).) In addition, civil and criminal penalties may be imposed.”

Reckitt Benckiser, Inc. v. Jackson, 762 F. Supp. 2d 34 (D.D.C. 2011). “…pesticides) (FIFRA § 4); § 136d (Administrative review; suspension) (FIFRA § 6); § 136j (Unlawful acts) (FIFRA § 12); 7 U.S.C. § 136k (Stop sale, use, removal, and seizure) (FI- *36 FRA § 13); and § 136i (Penalties) (FI-FRA § 14). A. Registration (7 U.S.C. § 136a) FIFRA…”

Turner v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 848 F. Supp. 711 (S.D. Miss. 1994). “See 7 U.S.C. § 136k. These same factual assertions support the State’s Motion to Dismiss.”

Ciba-Geigy Corp. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 607 F. Supp. 1467 (D.D.C. 1985). “Any of these procedures would provide Ciba-Geigy an opportunity for a hearing on the validity of EPA’s position and the merits of the misbranding determination.”

— 7 U.S.C. § 136k(b) — 3 cases

Almond Hill Sch. v. United States Dep't of Agric., 768 F.2d 1030 (9th Cir. 1985). “7 U.S.C. § 136k(a). 5 The Administrator may also seize and condemn pesticides that are misbranded or mislabeled.”

— 7 U.S.C. § 136k(b)(l)(A) — 1 case

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.