Legal Opinion

Professionals and Patients for Customized Care v. Shalala

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided June 16, 1995No. 94-20402PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WIENER, Circuit Judge:

In this challenge brought pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 1 Plaintiff-Appellant Professionals and Patients for Customized Care (P2C2) contends that the district court erred in concluding that Food & Drug Administration (FDA) Compliance Policy Guide 7132.16 (CPG 7132.16) is not a substantive rule and thus is not subject to the APA’s notice-and-comment requirement. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.

I

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

In 1992, the FDA promulgated CPG 7132.16 to address what the agency perceived to be a burgeoning problem in the pharmaceutical…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Chrysler Corp. v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Shalala v. Guernsey Memorial HospitalSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  3. Richard A. Batterton, Secretary of Employment & Social Services of the State of Maryland v. F. Ray Marshall, Secretary of LaborCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
  4. Richard Pickus v. United States Board of ParoleCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1974
  5. Texaco, Inc. v. Federal Power CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. State of Texas v. USACourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2015
  2. Iowa League of Cities v. Environmental Protection AgencyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2013
  3. Koenig v. Boulder Brands, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2014
  4. State of Texas v. USACourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2015
  5. Texas v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2015

37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API