Harry Sugarman v. Jack B. Forbragd

Good Law
405 F.2d 1189
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 11, 196922102_1California746 words

Opinion

Opinion

Merrill, J.

Appellant seeks by suit for injunction to review an order of the Food and Drug Administration excluding from import as adulterated certain damaged coffee beans.

In entering its order the Food and Drug Administration was acting for the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare pursuant to the terms of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. § 381 (a). The question presented is whether (absent arbitrary or capricious action which clearly is lacking here) such an order excluding material from import under § 381(a) is subject to judicial review. The District Court held that it was not. We agree.

Appellant contends that the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551-558 , 701-706, applies to require agency notice and hearing and provide judicial review. By the terms of that Act, § 701(a) (2), it is not to apply where “agency action is committed to agency discretion by law.”

In our judgment that is the situation here; by 21 U.S.C. § 381 (a) exclusion from import as there provided is committed to the discretion of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare.

We note that the prescribed procedure suggests final discretionary authority in the Secretary. His judgment must be…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.