§Why CasetextPricing

Security University v. Perez et al

Cross MOTION for Summary Judgment

46 Cited authorities

  1. Castle Rock v. Gonzales

    545 U.S. 748 (2005)   Cited 1,366 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a benefit is not a protected interest if government officials have discretion to grant or deny it

  2. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe

    401 U.S. 402 (1971)   Cited 5,969 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding a decision is committed to agency discretion when there is "no law to apply"

  3. Heckler v. Ringer

    466 U.S. 602 (1984)   Cited 1,750 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs' claims were not wholly collateral to a statutory scheme of administrative and judicial review of Medicare payment decisions, where plaintiffs' constitutional and statutory challenge to an agency's procedure for reaching payment decisions was "at bottom" an attempt to reverse the agency's decision to deny payment

  4. United States v. Locke

    471 U.S. 84 (1985)   Cited 671 times
    Holding that the plaintiffs’ actual intent was irrelevant to whether they satisfied a federal mining statute’s requirement to file a notice of intent to hold a mining claim by a certain date

  5. Carr v. U.S.

    560 U.S. 438 (2010)   Cited 275 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because SORNA "sets forth [its] travel requirement in the present tense," the statute's criminal penalties do not apply to a person whose interstate travel predated enactment

  6. James Madison Ltd., by Hecht v. Ludwig

    82 F.3d 1085 (D.C. Cir. 1996)   Cited 680 times
    Holding that the right to due process did not require a hearing before the government seized banks and allowed the FDIC to liquidate the banks

  7. American Wildlands v. Kempthorne

    530 F.3d 991 (D.C. Cir. 2008)   Cited 277 times
    Holding that an agency's use of available data and test methods was reasonable even though better test methods existed because those test methods had not yet been used on the species in question

  8. Networkip, LLC v. Federal Communications Commission

    548 F.3d 116 (D.C. Cir. 2008)   Cited 172 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that "arguments in favor of subject matter jurisdiction can be waived by inattention or deliberate choice"

  9. CTS Corp. v. Environmental Protection Agency

    759 F.3d 52 (D.C. Cir. 2014)   Cited 134 times
    Concluding that petitioner's reliance on post-decision expert report critiquing methodology used by EPA to evaluate groundwater contamination at a hazardous waste site was "procedurally foreclosed"

  10. Bennett v. Kentucky Dept. of Education

    470 U.S. 656 (1985)   Cited 96 times
    Holding that there was sufficient notice under Pennhurst where a statute made clear that some conditions were placed on the receipt of federal funds, and stating that Congress need not "specifically identif[y] and proscrib[e]" each condition in the legislation

  11. Section 706 - Scope of review

    5 U.S.C. § 706   Cited 20,440 times   184 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts jurisdiction to "compel agency action unlawfully held or unreasonably delayed"

  12. Rule 25 - Substitution of Parties

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 25   Cited 10,694 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Providing for the automatic substitution at the district-court level of public officers sued in their official capacities

  13. Section 1 - Words denoting number, gender, and so forth

    1 U.S.C. § 1   Cited 720 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Instructing that "words importing the plural include the singular," "unless the context indicates otherwise"

  14. Section 1001 - General definition of institution of higher education

    20 U.S.C. § 1001   Cited 179 times   16 Legal Analyses

    (a) Institution of higher education For purposes of this chapter, other than subchapter IV, the term "institution of higher education" means an educational institution in any State that- (1) admits as regular students only persons having a certificate of graduation from a school providing secondary education, or the recognized equivalent of such a certificate, or persons who meet the requirements of section 1091(d) of this title; (2) is legally authorized within such State to provide a program of

  15. Section 1002 - Definition of institution of higher education for purposes of student assistance programs

    20 U.S.C. § 1002   Cited 41 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Denying financial aid to for-profit schools that derive more than 90% of their revenue from Title IV funds

  16. Section 2371 - Community College and Career Training Grant Program

    19 U.S.C. § 2371   Cited 3 times

    (a) Grants authorized (1) In general Beginning August 1, 2009, the Secretary may award Community College and Career Training Grants to eligible institutions for the purpose of developing, offering, or improving educational or career training programs for workers eligible for training under section 2296 of this title. (2) Limitations An eligible institution may not be awarded- (A) more than one grant under this section; or (B) a grant under this section in excess of $1,000,000. (b) Definitions In

  17. Section 2372 - Authorization of appropriations

    19 U.S.C. § 2372

    (a) Authorization of appropriations There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Labor $40,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2009 and 2010, and $10,000,000 for the period beginning October 1, 2010, and ending December 31, 2010, to fund the Community College and Career Training Grant Program. Funds appropriated pursuant to this section shall remain available until expended. (b) Additional funds; minimum allocation to States There are appropriated $500,000,000 for each of fiscal years

  18. Section 602.20 - Enforcement of standards

    34 C.F.R. § 602.20   Cited 3 times

    (a) If the agency's review of an institution or program under any standard indicates that the institution or program is not in compliance with that standard, the agency must- (1) Follow its written policy for notifying the institution or program of the finding of noncompliance; (2) Provide the institution or program with a written timeline for coming into compliance that is reasonable, as determined by the agency's decision-making body, based on the nature of the finding, the stated mission, and

  19. Appendix A to Part 95 - Contract Provisions

    29 C.F.R. § 95 app A to Part 95   Cited 2 times

    All contracts, awarded by a recipient including simplified acquisitions, shall contain the following provisions as applicable: 1. Equal Employment Opportunity -All contracts shall contain a provision requiring compliance with E.O. 11246, "Equal Employment Opportunity," as amended by E.O. 11375, "Amending Executive Order 11246 Relating to Equal Employment Opportunity," and as supplemented by regulations at 41 CFR part 60 , "Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Equal Employment Opportunity

  20. Section 95.61 - Termination

    29 C.F.R. § 95.61   Cited 2 times

    (a) Awards may be terminated in whole or in part only if paragraphs (a) (1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) of this section apply. (1) By grant officers, if a recipient materially fails to comply with the terms and conditions of an award. (2) By grant officers, with the consent of the recipient, in which case the two parties shall agree upon the termination conditions, including the effective date and, in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated. (3) By the recipient upon sending to the grant

  21. Section 95.62 - Enforcement

    29 C.F.R. § 95.62   Cited 1 times

    (a)Remedies for noncompliance. If a recipient materially fails to comply with the terms and conditions of an award, whether stated in a Federal statute, regulation, assurance, application, or notice of award, DOL may, in addition to imposing any of the special conditions outlined in § 95.14 , take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances: (1) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the recipient or more severe enforcement action