River Street Donuts, LLC v. Napolitano

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an unpublished, non-precedential AAO decision ought be given Skidmore deference
• stating that courts must affirm an agency decision when it “is supported by a rational basis”
• CIS’s exclusion of depreciation from net income was not arbitrary or capricious because “amount spent on a long-term capital asset is a ‘real’ expense”
• “This Court cánnot ‘attempt to supply a reasoned basis for the action that the agency itself has not given.' ” (quoting Citizens Awareness Network v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 59 F.3d 284, 291 (1st Cir. 1995))
• “[A]n agency’s determination is arbitrary and capricious if the agency lacks a rational basis for... the determination or if the decision was not based on consideration of the relevant factors.” (citations and quotation omitted)
• noting the agency was departing from a “policy”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).