FEDERAL · 28 U.S.C. · Chapter 158
Petitions to review; proceedings
28 U.S.C. § 2347
Title28 — Judiciary and Judicial Procedure
Chapter158 — ORDERS OF FEDERAL AGENCIES; REVIEW
This text of 28 U.S.C. § 2347 (Petitions to review; proceedings) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
28 U.S.C. § 2347.
Text
(a)Unless determined on a motion to dismiss, petitions to review orders reviewable under this chapter are heard in the court of appeals on the record of the pleadings, evidence adduced, and proceedings before the agency, when the agency has held a hearing whether or not required to do so by law.
(b)When the agency has not held a hearing before taking the action of which review is sought by the petition, the court of appeals shall determine whether a hearing is required by law. After that determination, the court shall—
(1)remand the proceedings to the agency to hold a hearing, when a hearing is required by law;
(2)pass on the issues presented, when a hearing is not required by law and it appears from the pleadings and affidavits filed by the parties that no genuine issue of material fa
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
525 U.S. 471 (Supreme Court, 1999)
American Farm Lines v. Black Ball Freight Service
397 U.S. 532 (Supreme Court, 1970)
Wolde Amanuel Feleke v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
118 F.3d 594 (Eighth Circuit, 1997)
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee v. Reno
70 F.3d 1045 (Ninth Circuit, 1995)
Ramon Becerra-Jimenez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
829 F.2d 996 (Tenth Circuit, 1987)
Morales-Izquierdo v. Department of Homeland Security
600 F.3d 1076 (Ninth Circuit, 2010)
Suburban O'Hare Commission v. Elizabeth Hanford Dole, Secretary of the Department of Transportation
787 F.2d 186 (Seventh Circuit, 1986)
Joseph Paul v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service
521 F.2d 194 (Fifth Circuit, 1975)
Anton E. SPERLING, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America Et Al., Appellees
515 F.2d 465 (Third Circuit, 1975)
Reyes Garcia, Aurora Garcia, Epifanio Garcia and Eloy Garcia v. Hal W. Boldin
691 F.2d 1172 (Fifth Circuit, 1982)
Faustino Dolores v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
772 F.2d 223 (Sixth Circuit, 1985)
Majid Ghorbani v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
686 F.2d 784 (Ninth Circuit, 1982)
Qwest Communications International, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission
240 F.3d 886 (Tenth Circuit, 2001)
Citizens for a Safe Environment and the Environmental Coalition on Nuclear Power v. Atomic Energy Commission, Metropolitan Edison Company, Intervenors
489 F.2d 1018 (Third Circuit, 1974)
Hadi Alsheweikh v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
990 F.2d 1025 (Eighth Circuit, 1993)
Torabi v. Gonzales
165 F. App'x 326 (Fifth Circuit, 2006)
City of Los Angeles v. Federal Maritime Commission
385 F.2d 678 (D.C. Circuit, 1967)
The City of Portland, Oregon v. Federal Maritime Commission and United States of America, Japan Line, Ltd., Intervenors
433 F.2d 502 (D.C. Circuit, 1970)
Lake Carriers' Association v. United States of America and Federal Communications Commission
414 F.2d 567 (Sixth Circuit, 1969)
American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee v. Janet Reno
119 F.3d 1367 (Ninth Circuit, 1997)
Source Credit
History
(Added Pub. L. 89–554, §4(e), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 623.)
Editorial Notes
The headnotes of the subsections are omitted as unnecessary and to conform to the style of title 28.
In subsection (a), the words "the petition" following "on a motion to dismiss" are omitted as unnecessary. The word "are" is substituted for "shall be". The words "in fact" following "when the agency has" are omitted as unnecessary.
In subsection (b)(3), the words "United States" preceding "district court" are omitted as unnecessary because the term "district court" as used in title 28 means a United States district court. See section 451 of title 28, United States Code. The words "or any petitioner" are omitted as unnecessary in view of the definition of "petitioner" in section 2341 of this title. In the last sentence, the word "is" is substituted for "shall be".
In subsection (c), the words "applies" and "shows" are substituted for "shall apply" and "shall show", respectively.
Editorial Notes
References in Text
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsec. (b)(3), are set out in the Appendix to this title.
In subsection (a), the words "the petition" following "on a motion to dismiss" are omitted as unnecessary. The word "are" is substituted for "shall be". The words "in fact" following "when the agency has" are omitted as unnecessary.
In subsection (b)(3), the words "United States" preceding "district court" are omitted as unnecessary because the term "district court" as used in title 28 means a United States district court. See section 451 of title 28, United States Code. The words "or any petitioner" are omitted as unnecessary in view of the definition of "petitioner" in section 2341 of this title. In the last sentence, the word "is" is substituted for "shall be".
In subsection (c), the words "applies" and "shows" are substituted for "shall apply" and "shall show", respectively.
Editorial Notes
References in Text
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, referred to in subsec. (b)(3), are set out in the Appendix to this title.
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
28 U.S.C. § 2347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/28/2347.