Pinnacle Armor, Inc. v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that Mathews “is not a bright line test, but is flexible depending on the circumstances”
• noting that courts “may also look to 26 regulations, established agency policies, or judicial decisions for a meaningful standard to 27 review”
• noting courts 14 “may also look to regulations, established agency policies, or judicial decisions for a 15 meaningful standard to review”
• dismissing Due Process claim when plaintiff “had ample opportunities to submit evidence both before and after the Notice was revoked” and the state actor “explained its decision . . . even if no formal administrative hearings took place”
• “Although the [agency regulations] provide that the [agency] determines the ‘sufficiency’ of a manufacturer’s evidence and statements, the [agency regulations] do not give the [agency] unbridled discretion.”
• \Just because a statute calls on the agency to exercise its 'judgment' in making its determination does not necessarily make an agency's action unreviewable.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).