FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T APR 7, 2009 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 0 8- 10 23 6

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Age nc y No. 0 5- 00 16 -AWA NO. LANCELOT KOLLMAN RAMOS, a.k .a. Lanc el otRam os Kol lm an , Pet it io ne r,
ve rs us U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Res po nd en t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w of aDeci si on of th e Dep art m en t o f Agr ic ul tu re

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Apri l 7 , 20 09 ) Befo re EDMONDSON, Ch ie f Ju dg e, ANDERSON, Circ ui t J ud ge , andCOHILL, * Dis tri ctJu dg e. COHILL, Dis tri ctJu dg e:

Honora ble Mauric e B . Cohill , J r., United States District Judge f or the Western D istrict * of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation.Pen di ng be fo re thi s C ou rt i s a “ Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w” fi le d b y form er pr o s e Pet it io ne r Lan cel otKol lm anRam os a/k/aLanc el otRam os Kol lm an(“ Kol lm an ”). Kol lm ansee ks to have th is co urt re vi ew an d s etasi de a Deci si on an d Ord er o f a U.S. Depa rtment o f Agr ic ul tu re (“ USDA”) Jud ic ia l Offi cer r en de redon Octo be r 2, 20 07 . He see ks rem an d o f th e m at te r fo r a fu ll he ari ng ona Co m pl ai ntfil edag ai ns t hi m an d o th ers forvi ol at io ns of the Ani m al W el fare Act (t he “ AWA”), as am en de d, 7 U.S.C. § § 2 13 1- 21 59 , andth e reg ul at io ns an d s tand ard s i ss ue d u nd er the AWA, 9 C.F.R. § § 1 .1 et

seq . (th e “ Reg ul at io ns ” an d “ St an da rd s” ). Co ng res s en act edth e AWA to en su re tha t an im al s i nt en de d fo r us e inres earc h fa ci li ti es , forex hi bi ti on or fo r us e as pe ts “ are p ro vi de d h um an e car e an d treat m en t.” 7 U.S.C. § 2 13 1. Th is Co urt h as juri sd ic ti on ov er the Pet it io n p ur su an t t o 2 8 U.S.C. § § 2 34 1- 23 50 . For th e rea so ns setforth be lo w, we affi rm th e Ju di ci al Offic er’s Oct ob er 2 , 20 07 Deci si on an d Ord er. I. BACKGROUND Thi s ca se was i ni ti at edon Apri l 2 6, 2 00 5, wh enanAdm in is tra to r wit h t he Ani m al an d P la ntHeal th Ins pe ct io n S erv ic e o f th e Uni te d S ta te s Dep art m en t o f Agr ic ul tu re (t he “ Adm in is tra to r”) i ns ti tu te d adi sc ip li na ry adm in is tra ti ve pr oc eed in g a ga in stKol lm an , hi s fa th er, Ma nu el Ram os , ano th er i nd iv idua l n am ed Pet er Oct av e Car on (“ Caro n” ), an d aco rp or at io n, Oct ag on Seque nc e o f Eig ht , Inc
. 2(“ Octa go n” ) by fil in g aCo m pl ai ntwith t he Secr et ary of Agri cu ltur e. Onl y

Kol lm an
rem ai ns in th is cas e. Caro n d ie d; Man ue l Ra m os ne ve r res po nd ed , anda de fau lt de ci si on was e nt eredag ai ns t h im ; Oct ag on ti m el y an swe redan d t he pro ceed in gs ag ai ns t i t ev en tu al ly sett le d i n Ap ril 20 08
. Inth e Co m

pl ai nt , th e Adm in is tra to r al le ge d t ha t Ko ll m anwil lfu ll y vi ol at ed th e AWA, th e Reg ul at io ns , andth e St an da rd s. M or e sp eci fic al ly, th e Co m pl ai nt al le ge d t ha t Ko ll m anha d asm al l b us in es s; th e g rav it y of h is vi ol at io ns of t he AWA, th e Reg ul at io ns , andth e St an da rd s was gre at ; h e kno win gl y op erat edas a de al er wi th ou t a v al idli cen se ; h e cau se d i nju rie s t o t wo l io ns th atres ul te d i n t he de ath o f on e o f th em , andhe li edto in ve st ig at or s ab ou t h is act io ns . Com pl ai nt , ¶ 6. The Co m pl ai ntfurth er al le ge d tha t b etween May 10, 2 00 1 a ndth e d at e o f th e fi li ng of th e p ro ceed in g a ga in sthi m , Apri l 2 9, 2 00 5, Ko ll m ankn owi ng ly fail edto ob ey a
ceas e an d d es is t o rd er i ss ue d b y th e Sec ret ary of

Agri cu ltur e p ur su an t t o s ect io n 21 49 (b ) of

th e AWA, inIn r e La nc el ot Ko llman , aka La nc e Ramo s, r es po nden t , 60 Agr ic . Dec. 19 0, AWA D oc ke t No . 01 -0 01 2, wh ic h s pe ci fic al ly pro vi de d t ha t:

“ [r]esp on de nt , hi s ag en ts an d e m pl oyees, s uc ces so rs an d a ss ig ns , di rect ly or th ro ug h a ny corp or at e d ev ic e, sh al l ce as e an d d es is t fr om vi ol at in g t he Act an d t he Reg ul at io ns an d S ta nd ard s.” Id . at ¶ 8 . The Co m pl ai ntals o a ll eg edth atonor abo ut Sep te m be r 13 , 20 00 , Kol lm anop erat edas ade al er, as th atterm is de fin edin th e 3AWA andth e Reg ul at io ns , “by del iv eri ng fortra ns po rta ti on , or t ran sp orti ng , two

li on s fo r ex hi bi ti on , witho utha vi ng a va li d l ic en se to do so , inwil lfu l v io la ti on of
se ct io ns 2.1 , 2.1 0( c) an d 2 .10 0( a) o f th e Reg ul at io ns . 9 C.F.R . §§ 2.1 , 2.1 0( c), 2.1 00 (a).” Id. a t ¶ 9 . The Co m pl ai ntne xtall eg edth aton or abo utSep te m be r 13 , 20 00 , Kol lm anen ga ge d i n s pe ci fie d c on du ctwhi ch co ns ti tu te d wi ll fu l v io la ti on of
se ct io n 2 .40 of t he Reg ul at io ns , whi ch go ve rn s t he pro vi si on of v et eri na ry care to
an im al s. Id . at ¶ 1 0. Th e Co m pl ai ntth ench arg edth aton or abo utDecem be r 13 , 20 00 , Kol lm anen ga ge d i n s pe ci fie d c on du ctwhi ch co ns ti tu te d wi ll fu l v io la ti on of
se ct io n 2 .13 1( a)(1 ) an d (a )(2 )(I) o f th e Reg ul at io ns . Id. at¶¶ 1 2- 16 . Fin al ly, th e Co m pl ai ntso ug htto ha ve Kol lm anord eredto ceas e an d d es is t fr om vi ol at in g t he Act a ndth e Reg ul at io ns an d S tand ard s i ss ue d t he reu nd er, b e as se ss edciv il pe na lt ie s, an d h av e h is li cen se rev ok edor s us pe nd ed . Id. On M ay 2, 2 00 5, a h eari ng cle rkfro m th e Offi ce o f Adm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg es sen t t o Ko ll m anby certi fie d m ai l, re tu rnrece ip t re qu es te d, a c op y of t he Co m pl ai nt , th e Ru le s o f Prac ti ce Go ve rn in g F orm al Adju di cat ory Pro ceed in gs In st itut edby the Secr et ary Und er Vari ou s St atut es (th e “ Ru le s o f Prac ti ce”) , 7 C.F.R. § § 1 .13 0.1 51 , anda le tt er wh ic h s ta te d i n p ert in en t p art : [a]ls o e nc lo se d i s a c op y

of t he Ru le s o f Prac ti ce, wh ic h g ov ern th e co nduc t of th es e p ro ceed in gs . Yoush ou ldfam il ia riz e y ou rs el f with t he rul es inth at th e co m m en ts , whi ch fol lo w, are n ota subs ti tu te forth ei r ex actrequi rem en ts . 4The rul es sp eci fy th aty oum ay

rep res en t your se lf p ers on al ly or by an at to rn ey of r eco rd . Unl es s an att orne y fil es anap pe aran ce o n you r be ha lf, i t sh al l b e p res um edth aty ouha ve ele ct edto rep res en t your se lf p ers on al ly. Mo stim po rta nt ly, y ouha ve 20 da y s fr om th e rec ei ptof t hi s l et te r to fil e wit h th e Heari ng Cle rkanori gi na l an d fo ur co pi es of you r writ te n andsi gn ed an swe r to th e co m

pl ai nt . It i s n eces sary

th aty ou r an swe r se t fo rth an y de fen se y ouwis h t o a ss ert , andto sp eci fic al ly adm it , den y or e xp la ineach al le ga ti on of the co m

pl ai nt . You r an swe r m ay

in cl ud e a req ue stfor

anora l h eari ng . Fai lu re t o fi le an an swe r orfil in g a n a ns wer wh ic h d oe s n otde ny the m at eri al all eg at io ns of th e co m pl ai nt , sh al l co ns ti tu te anadm is si onof t ho se all eg at io ns an d awaiv er of y ou r ri gh t t o a n o ral he ari ng . (em ph as is in ori gi na l). Kol lm anrece iv edth e Co m pl ai nt , th e Ru le s o f Prac ti ce, an d t he servi ce l et te r
on Ju ly 5, 20 05 . W it hi n t he twen ty day s, h e fi le d ares po ns e, da te d J ul y 15 , 20 05 , whi chth e USDA rece iv edon Ju ly 22, 2 00 5.Th e res po ns e st at edin pe rti ne ntpa rt: I Lan cel otRam os Kol lm anam res po nd in g t o aco m

pl ai ntIn r e: OCTAGON SEQUENCE OF EIGHT, INC., a Flo rid a co rp or at io n do in g b us si ne ss [si c] as OCTAGON W ILDLIFE SANCTUARY AND OCTAGON ANIMAL SHOW CASE; PETER OCTAVE CARON an in di vi du al ; LANCELOT KOLL MAN anin di vi du al an d M ANUEL RAMOS a n i nd iv idua l: AWA DOCKET #05 -0 01 6. I Lan cel otKol lm anas ain di vi du al am to [si c] requ es ti ng anora l he ari ng of t hi s co m

pl ai nt . Ple as e se ndan y

an d a ll res po ns es to th is ad dr es s . . . . Thu s, h e reque st eda he ari ng bu t d idno t o fferan y de ni al or d efen se . On J ul y 25 , 20 05 , Kol lm anrece iv eda le tt er fro m a he ari ng cle rk

at t he Offic e o f

5Adm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg es . The l ette r st at ed :

Res po nd en ts Ans wer h as be enrece iv edan d fi le d o n J ul y 22 , 20 05 , in th e ab ov e-capt io ne d p ro ceed in g. Youwil l b e in fo rm edof a ny futur e act io n t ak enin th is m at te r. The reaf te r, th e cas e la y

do rm an t fo r al m os t t wo years. OnApri l 1 2, 2 00 7, t he Adm in is tra to r fi le d a“ Mo ti on forAdo pt io n o f Pro po se d Dec is io n a ndOrde r as to Lan cel otRam os by Reaso n o f Adm is si onof F act s” (th e “ Mo ti on forDefau lt Deci si on ”) al on g wi th a “ Pro po se d Dec is io n a ndOrde r as to Lanc el otKol lm an Ram os by Reaso n o f Adm is si onof F act s” (th e “ Pro po se d Def au ltDeci si on ”). A he ari ng cle rkfro m

th e Offi ce o f Adm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg es th ensen t Ko ll m ana le tt er, d at edApri l 1 2, 2 00 7, s ta ti ng th atsh e h aden cl os edco pi es of t he Mo ti on for Defau ltDeci si on an d t he Pro po se d Def au ltDeci si on an d t ha t “ [i]n a cco rd an ce wi th th e ap pl ic ab le Ru le s o f Prac ti ce, y ouwil l h av e 2 0 d ay s fr om th e rec ei ptof t hi s le tt er i n wh ic h t o fi le with thi s o ffi ce an ori gi na l an d t hr ee co pi es of o bjec ti on s t o th e Mo ti on forDeci si on .” Kol lm anrece iv edth is co rres po nd en ce o n Ap ril 18 , 20 07
. On M ay

9, 2 00 7, t wen ty-on e d ay s af te r Apr il 18 , 20 07 , a he ari ng cle rkfro m th e Offi ce o f Adm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg es sen t Ko ll m ana le tt er. The let te r st at ed : [a]n o bjec ti on to Co m

pl ai na nt ’s Mo ti on ha s n otbe enrece iv edwithi n th e al lo tt edti m e.

6Inacco rd an ce wi th th e ap pl ic ab le Ru le s o f Prac ti ce, the fil e is be in g

refe rredto th e Adm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg e fo r co ns id erat io n a nd de ci si on . On t ha t s am e d ay , May 9, 2 00 7, t he Adm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg e (the “ ALJ”) is su edhi s “ Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er as to Lanc el otKol lm anRam os a/k/a Lan cel otRam os Kol lm an ” (the “ Defau ltDeci si on ”). In th e Defau ltDeci si on , th e ALJ co nc lu de d, in te r a li a , th atKol lm anha d v io la te d v ari ou s p ro vi si on s o f th e Reg ul at io ns as a ll eg edin th e Co m pl ai ntan d tha t t he se vi ol at io ns ha d b een wil lfu l. The ALJ th enord eredKol lm anto ceas e an d d es is t fr om vi ol at in g the AWA andth e Reg ul at io ns an d S ta nd ard s, re vo ke d Ko ll m an ’s AWA li cen se , andass es se d a“ ci vi l pe na lty ” o f $4 3,5 00 ag ai ns t h im . The ALJdi d n otex pl ai n h ow h e arr iv edat t he $4 3,5 00 pe na lt y . The Defau ltDeci si on was m ai le d t o Ko ll m anon May 9, 20 07 , alo ng with a le tt er tha t s ta te d i n p artth atKol lm anha d “ 30 da y s fr om th e se rv ic e o f th is de ci si on
an d o rd er i n wh ic h t o fi le anap pe al to th e Dep art m en t’s J ud ic ia l Offi cer.” Kol lm an
rece iv edth e Defau ltDeci si on on May 16, 2 00 7. On M ay 11 , 20 07 , th ree d ay s l at e an d a fte r th e Defau ltDeci si on ha d b een
m ai le d t o Ko ll m an , th e Offi ce o f Adm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg es rece iv eda le tt er fro m Kol lm anda te d Ap ril 27 , 20 07 , whi ch st at ed : “ I Lan cel otKol lm anhe reb y de ny all ch arg es an d re qu es t a h eari ng onth e al le ga ti on s m en ti on edin th e m ot io n fo r
7ad op ti on of p ro po se d d eci si on .”

On J un e 6 , 20 07 , th e Offi ce o f Adm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg es rece iv edan ot he r le tt er fro m

Kol lm an , th is ti m e co nc ern in g t he Defau ltDeci si on . In t he let te r Kol lm anst at ed : I am inrece ip t o f y ou r res po ns e to m y de ni al of c ha rg es / J ud ge s Ord ers . I co nt inue to de ny all th e ch arg es an d h av e d oc um en ta ti on th atpro ve s I am no t g ui lt y

of t he ch arg es st at ed
. I he reb y reque stto ap pe al th e d eci si onan d re qu es t an ora l h eari ng wit h ajud ge wher e I can pre se ntev id en ce. The let te r in st ru ct s m e to refe r to 7C .F.R.1 .14 5. Where canI fin d t hi s in fo rm at io n? If thi s l ette r is no t s uf

fic ie ntto reque stanora l h eari ng an d fi le an ap pe al , Ple as e se ndin fo rm at io n a s h ow t o d o s o. On J ul y 2, 2 00 7, the Offic e o f Adm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg es rece iv edan othe r le tt er fro m Kol lm an , dat edJu ne 26 , 20 07 . The Offi ce o f Adm in is tra ti ve Law Ju dg es tre at edth is let te r as a Reque stfor a Heari ng an d fo rward editto th e Ju di ci al Offic er
as si gn edto th e cas e. On J ul y 9, 2 00 7, the Ju di ci al Offic er en te redanInf orm al Ord er wh erei n h e d et erm in edth at : (1 ) Kol lm an ’s Ju ne 6, 2 00 7 “ reque stto ap pe al ” le tt er co ns ti tu te d areque stforanex te ns io n o f ti m e wit hi n wh ic h t o fi le anap pe al pe ti ti on , (2) Kol lm an ’s reque stwas g ran te d up t o a ndin cl ud in g J ul y 2, 2 00 7; an d (3 ) Kol lm an ’s Ju ne 26 , 20 07 let te r, fil edon Ju ly 2, 20 07 , con st itut eda ti m el y fil ed ap pe al pe ti ti on .

8On J ul y 30 , 20 07 , Kol lm an , no w rep res en te d b y co un se l, fi le d a“ Mo ti on to SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er as to Lanc el otKol lm anRam os a/k/a Lan cel otRam os Kol lm an ” (“ Mo ti on to SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er”)
. On Oct ob er 2 , 20 07 , th e Ju di ci al Offic er fi le d a“ Deci si on an d Ord er as to Lan cel otKol lm anRam os ” (“ th e Deci si on an d Ord er”) . Rele va ntto th e in st an t ap pe al , th e Ju di ci al Offic er fo un d a s fo ll ows . Firs t, h e fo un d t ha t i n Ko ll m an ’s Ju ly 22 , 20 05 res po ns e, Kol lm anreque st edanora l h eari ng , bu t fa il edto de ny or ot he rwis e res po ndto an y of the all eg at io ns inth e Co m pl ai ntfil edag ai ns t h im
. The refo re, the Ju di ci al Offic er co nc lu de d, p ur su an t t o s ect io n 1 .13 6( c) o f th e Ru le s of Prac ti ce, 7 C.F.R. § 1.1 36 (c), Ko ll m anwas d eem edto ha ve adm it te d the al le ga ti on s i n t he Co m

pl ai nt . The Ju di ci al Offic er fu rth er fo un d tha t Ko ll m anfai le d t o fi le ob jecti on s t o th e Adm in is tra to r’s Mo ti on forDefau ltDeci si onan d P ro po se d Def au ltDeci si on by May 8, 20 07 , as re qu ire d u nd er s ect io n 1 .13 9 o f th e Ru le s o f Prac ti ce. He al so co nc lu de d tha t t he Ju ly 30, 2 00 7 “ Mo ti on to SetAsi de Defau lt Deci si on an d Ord er” f

il in g was anap pe al pe ti ti on , th atpu rs ua ntto sec ti on 1.1 45 (a) of th e Ru le s o f Prac ti ce a p arty m ay on ly file a si ng le ap pe al pe ti ti on , th atKol lm an di d n otreque stth e o pp ortu ni ty to s up pl em en t o r am en d h is Ju ly 2, 20 07 ap pe al pe ti ti on , andth atth e se co ndap pe al pe ti ti on was fi le d 2 8 d ay s af te r th e ex pi rat io n 9of

th e ti m e fo r fi li ng hi s ap pe al pe ti ti on . On the ba si s o f th es e co nc lu si on s, the Ju di ci al Offic er s tru ck

th e Ju ly 30, 2 00 7 “ Mo ti on to SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on
an d Ord er” f

ro m th e rec or d a nddi d n otad dr es s an y is su es rai se d i n t he Mo ti on . The Ju di ci al Offic er al so de te rm in edth atKol lm an ’s AWA li cen se was t o b e
rev ok edan d a ss es se d Ko ll m ana ci vi l p en al ty of $1 3,7 50 (as op po se d t o t he $4 3,5 00 pe na lt y

pre vi ou sl y

im po se d b y th e ALJ). Fo r pu rp os es of d et erm in in g t hi s pe na lty , th e Ju di ci al Offic er co ns id ered , as re qu ire d b y 7 U.S.C. § 21 49 (b ): ( 1) th e si ze o f Kol lm an ’s bu si ne ss ; (2 ) th e g rav it y of Ko ll m an ’s vi ol at io ns ; (3 ) Kol lm an ’s go odfai th ; an d (4 ) Kol lm an ’s hi st ory of p rev io us vi ol at io ns . The J ud ic ia l Offi cer
co nc lu de d: (1) Kol lm anop erat eda sm al l b us in es s; (2) th e g rav it y of Ko ll m an ’s vi ol at io ns , op erat in g a s a d eal er wi th ou t an Ani m al W el fare li cen se an d c au si ng in juri es to two li on s wi th on e o f th e li on s d y in g, was gre at ; an d (3 ) ba se d upo n Kol lm anha vi ng be ena res po nd en t i n o ne pre vi ou s An im al W el fare en fo rcem en t
cas e, th atKol lm anlac ke d g oo d fa it h a ndha d ahi st ory of p rev io us vi ol at io ns . Bas edup on hi s fi nd in g t ha t Ko ll m anwas d eem edto ha ve adm it te d fi ve vi ol at io ns of th e Reg ul at io ns an d S ta nd ard s an d t ha t Ko ll m anco ul d b e as se ss eda m ax im um ci vi l p en al ty of $2 ,75 0 fo r eac h o f hi s fi ve vi ol at io ns of t he Reg ul at io ns an d St an da rd s, the Ju di ci al Offic er d et erm in edKol lm an ’s civ il pe na lt y to be $1 3,7 50
. On No ve m

be r 15 , 20 07 , Kol lm anfil eda Mo ti on forReh eari ng on th e 10Defau ltDeci si on , whi ch th e Ju di ci al Offic er treat edas aPet it io n fo r Reh eari ng . On

Decem be r 17 , 20 07 , aft er co ns id erat io n o f th e m eri ts of t he Pet it io n fo r Reh eari ng , th e Ju di ci al Offic er d en ie d t he Pet it io n. II. STANDARD OF REVIEW Und er the Adm in is tra ti ve Pro cedur es Act, we m us t s etasi de an y

ag en cy act io n tha t i s fo un d t o b e arb itrary, capri ci ou s, an ab us e o f di sc ret io n, i n e xc es s o f st atut ory au th or it y , or wi th ou t o bs erv an ce o f pr oc edur e as requi redby law, or i s
co nt rary to co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht , po wer, p riv il eg e, orimm un ity . 5 U.S.C. § 70 6( 2)
.

“ Und er thi s s ta nd ard , we gi ve de fere nc e to a fi na l ag en cy de ci si on by revi ewin g fo r cl ear e rro r, an d we c an no t s ub st itut e o urown jud gm en t fo r th atof t he ag en cy .” Si erraClub v . Jo hn so n, 4 36 F.3d12 69 , 12 73 (11 Cir . 20 06 ), ci ti ng , Sie rra C lub v
. th U.S. Arm y Co rp s o f Eng in eers , 29 5 F .3d12 09 , 12 16 (11 th Cir . 20 02 ) (i nt ern al ci ta ti on om it te d) . Furt he rm or e: [a]ltho ug h t he st an dardof r ev ie w app li edto fin al ag en cy de ci si on s i s de fere nt ia l, the m at te r is a li tt le m or e co m pl ic at edth anth at . Und er the arb it rary andcap ric io us st an da rd , we m us t co ns id er wh ethe r an ag en cy 's d eci si on “ was ba se d o n aco ns id erat io n o f th e rel ev an t fa ct or s an d wh ethe r th ere h as be ena cl ear e rro r of jud gm en t.” F un d fo r Ani m al s, In c. v. Ri ce, 8 5 F .3d53 5, 5 41 (11 th Cir .19 96 ) (quo ta ti on m ark s o m it te d) . “ Thi s i nqui ry m us t b e se arch in g a ndcare fu l, b utth e ul ti m at e st an dardof r ev ie w is a na rro w on e.” Id . (qu ot at io n m ark s om it te d)
. Si erraClub, 4 36 F.3dat 1 27 3- 74
. 11III. DISC USSION

Prel im in ari ly, Kol lm anrai se d t wo ar gu m en ts onap pe al th atwe fin d wer e n ot pr op erl y rai se d b efo re the Ju di ci al Offic er, an d wer e th eref or e wai ve d. Se e U.S. v. L.A. T uc ke r Tru ckLin es , Inc ., 34 4 U.S. 3 3, 3 7, 7 3 S .Ct. 6 7, 9 7 L.Ed . 54 (19 52 ) (“ [s ]im pl e fai rn es s ... requi res as age ne ral rul e th atco urts sh ou ldno t t op pl e o ve r adm in is tra ti ve de ci si on s u nl es s t he adm in is tra ti ve bo dy no t o nl y ha s erredbu t h as
erre d a ga in stob

jecti on m ad e atth e ti m e ap pr op ria te un de r it s p ract ic e.”); McC on ne ll v. U.S. Dep t. o f Agr ic ul tu re, 1 98 Fed .App x. 4 17 , 42 4- 25 (6 Cir
. th 20 06 ), ci ti ng , 7 C.F.R . § 1 .14 5( a) (app el la te co urt re fu se d t o c on si de r du e p ro ces s arg um en ts rai se d b y

ap pe ll an ts be cau se th ey

ha d fa il edto ex haus t t he se arg um en ts by pres en ti ng th em

to th e Ju di ci al Offic er o n a dm in is tra ti ve ap pe al ); Ex cel Co rp . v. U.S. Dept . of Ag ric ul tu re, 3 97 F.3d12 85 , 12 96 -9 7 (1 0 Cir . 20 05 ) (h ol di ng th arg um en ts waiv edon ap pe al fro m Ju di ci al Offic er’s o pi ni on wher e th ere was no in di cat io n i n t he reco rdon ap pe al th atth e arg um en ts ha d b een pre se nt edto th e Ju di ci al Offic er). Th e fi rs t o f th e wai ve d a rg um en ts is th atth e Ju di ci al Offic er ab us edhi s d is cret io n, co m m it te d re ve rs ib le erro r, an d v io la te d Ko ll m an ’s du e pr oc es s ri gh ts when he fai le d t o a ccep t Ko ll m an ’s Apri l 2 7, 2 00 7 l ette r ei th er as an ob jecti onto th e p ro po se d d efau ltde ci si onor a s a t im el y fil edam en de d a ns wer. Seco nd , Kol lm anarg ue s t ha t t he Ju di ci al Offic er ab us edhi s d is cret io n, co m m it te d
12rev ers ib le erro r, an d v io la te d Ko ll m an ’s du e p ro ces s ri gh ts when he ass es se d aciv il

pe na lty ag ai ns t Ko ll m anba se d i n p arton hi s d et erm in at io n t ha t a M ay 20 01
co ns en t o rd er en te redin to by K ol lm anest ab li sh edth atKol lm anlac ke d g oo d fa it h
an d h ada hi st ory

of p rev io us vi ol at io ns . Kol lm anarg ue s t ha t s in ce the co ns en t
or de r was no t i n e xi st en ce i n S ep te m be r an d Dec em

be r 20 00 , th e ti m e th e ev en ts rel ev an t t o t he Co m

pl ai ntto okpl ace, h e co ul d n otbe fou ndto ha ve vi ol at edit
. W it h re sp ectto Kol lm an ’s arg um en t co nc ern in g t he m on et ary pe na lty is su ed ag ai ns t h im , we sp eci fic al ly find , con tra ry to Kol lm an ’s con te nt io n, t ha t Ko ll m an di d n otpro pe rly rais e th is is su e b efo re the Ju di ci al Offic er wh enhe st at edin hi s Ju ne 26 , 20 07 let te r “ [s ]o I as k p le as e co ns id er thi s I n ev er wi ll fu ll y act edon whatI
am accu se d o f.” Mo reo ve r, with re sp ectto Kol lm an ’s arg um en ts ab ou t t he Apri l 27 , 20 07 let te r, ha d we r ev ie wedth e is su e o n t he m eri ts , we wou ldha ve fou ndno
erro r onth e p artof t he Ju di ci al Offic er i n h is tre at m en t o f th e le tt er; th e le tt er was fil edaft er the ALJ’s Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er h adbe enis su edan d n ot hi ng in th e le tt er es tabl is he d g oo d c au se forall owi ng anam en dm en t o f th e an swe r as requi red by sect io n 1 .13 7( a) o f th e Ru le s o f Prac ti ce, 7 C.F.R. § 1.1 37 (a). W e n ow ad dr es s t hr ee i ss ue s ra is edby K ol lm anonap pe al : (1 ) whe th er the USDA rev ers ib ly erredin fin di ng th atKol lm ande fau lt edan d t he reb y adm it te d t he al le ga ti on s ag ai ns t h im

when in Ju ly 200 5 h e ti m el y res po nd edto th e 13Adm in is tra to r’s Co m pl ai ntan d re qu es te d ahe ari ng ; (2 ) whe th er the Ju di ci al Offi cer abu se d h is di sc ret io n i n s tri ki ng an d re fu si ng to co ns id er Ko ll m an ’s m ot io n to setasi de de fau lt ; an d (3 ) whe th er the Ju di ci al Offic er ab us edhi s d is cret io n i n
rev ok in g Ko ll m an ’s AWA li cen se . Und ers co rin g a ll of t he se arg um en ts is 1 Kol lm an ’s con te nt io n t ha t t he se act io ns by the ag en cy vi ol at edpri nc ip le s o f fu nd am en ta l fa irn es s embod ie d i n t he Due P ro ces s C laus e o f th e Fi fth Am en dm en t to th e Uni te d S ta te s C on st itut io n, t he Adm in is tra ti ve Pro cedur e Act , th e AWA, and th e USDA’s own rul es . W e tu rnfir stto th e arg um en t t ha t s in ce Ko ll m anwas a ct in g pr o s e at t he ti m e h e fi le d h is Ju ly 22, 2 00 5 l et te r, th e ALJ s ho ul d h av e co ns tru edth e le tt er li be ral ly andreaditas Ko ll m ande nyin g the m at eri al all eg at io ns of t he Co m pl ai nt fil edag ai ns t h im . It i s wel l es tabl is he d t ha t pr o s e pl ead in gs are t o b e li be ral ly
co ns tru ed . See Bo xe r X v. Harr is , 43 7 F .3d11 07 , 11 10 (11 Cir . 20 06 ). th Sect io n 1 .13 6 o f th e Ru le s o f Prac ti ce, a co py of wh ic h was pro vi de d t o Kol lm an , st at es in pe rti ne ntpa rt: § 1 .13 6 An swe r. (a) Fi li ng an d s erv ic e. W it hi n 2 0 d ay s af te r th e se rv ic e o f th e co m pl ai nt(wit hi n 1 0 d ay s i n apro ceed in g u nd er s ect io n 4 (d ) of th e
W e f i n d a n y r e m a i n i n g a r g u m e n t s b y K o l l m a n l a c k s i g n i f i c a n t m e r i t a n d 1 t h e r e f o r e , f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e a r g u m e n t s i s n o t n e e d e d
. 14Peri sh ab le Agri cu ltur al Co m m od it ie s Act , 19 30 ), orsu ch ot he r ti m e as m ay be sp eci fie d t he rei n, t he res po nd en t s ha ll fil e wit h t he Heari ng Cl erkanan swe r si gn edby the res po nd en t o r th e at to rn ey of r eco rdin th e p ro ceed in g. . . . (b ) Co nt en ts . The an swe r sh al l: (1 ) Cl earl y

adm it , den y , or e xp la ineach of t he all eg at io ns of the Co m pl ai ntan d s ha ll cle arl y

setforth an y

de fen se ass ert edby the res po nd en t; or (2 ) St at e th atth e res po nd en t ad m it s al l t he fact s al le ge d i n t he co m pl ai nt ; o r (3 ) St at e th atth e res po nd en t ad m it s t he juri sd ic ti on al all eg at io ns of t he co m pl ai ntan d n ei th er ad m it s n orde ni es th e rem ai ni ng all eg at io ns an d co ns en ts to th e is su an ce o f anord er wi th ou t fu rth er p ro cedur e. (c) Def au lt . Fai lu re t o fi le anan swe r wit hi n t he ti m e p ro vi de d u nd er pa rag rap h (a ) of

th is sec ti on sh al l b e d eem ed , forpu rp os es of t he pr oc eed in g, an adm is si on of t he all eg at io ns in th e Co m pl ai nt , and fai lu re t o d en y

or o th erwi se res po ndto anall eg at io n o f th e Co m pl ai nt sh al l b e d eem ed , forpu rp os es of t he pro ceed in g, anadm is si on of s ai d al le ga ti on , un le ss th e p art ie s h av e ag reedto a co ns en t d eci si on pu rs uantto § 1 .13 8. 7 C .F.R. § 1 .13 6. Atth e ti m e Kol lm anwas s erv edwith t he Co m pl ai nt , a let te r
acco m pani editex pl ic it ly exp la in in g t o Ko ll m anth atwhi le “ [y ]ouran swe r m ay in cl ud e a req ue stforanora l h eari ng ,” th e “ [f]ail ur e to fil e anan swe r orfil in g a n
an swe r whi ch do es no t d en y th e m at eri al all eg at io ns of t he co m pl ai nt , sh al l
co ns ti tu te anadm is si on of t ho se all eg at io ns an d awaiv er o f y ou r ri gh t t o a n o ral he ari ng .”
15Eve n c on st ru in g Ko ll m an ’s let te r li be ral ly, th e co nt en ts of h is Ju ly 22, 2 00 5

le tt er s im pl y do no t equa te to a de ni al or o th er re sp on se to any of the all eg at io ns ag ai ns t h im

in th e Co m

pl ai nt . There fo re, the USDA di d n oterr wh enitco nc lu de d, pu rs ua ntto Ru le of P ract ic e 1 .13 6( c), 7 C.F.R. § 1.1 36 (c), tha t Ko ll m anfai le d t o de ny or o th erwi se res po ndto an y of t he m at eri al all eg at io ns of t he Co m pl ai ntan d th us was d eem edto ha ve adm it te d a ll th os e al le ga ti on s. W e tu rnne xtto th e arg um en t t ha t t he Ju di ci al Offic er ab us edhi s d is cret io n whe n h e st ru ckan d re fu se d t o c on si de r th e “ Mo ti on to SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on
an d Ord er” f

il edby K ol lm an ’s att orne y on Ju ly 30, 2 00 7. Mo re s pe ci fic al ly, Kol lm an ’s arg um en t i s t ha t t he Ju di ci al Offic er erredwith re sp ectto hi s t reat m en t of Kol lm an ’s Mo ti on to SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er s in ce the USDA di d
no t s uf fer a ny preju di ce as a res ul t o f Kol lm an ’s pro cedur al erro rs , th e st ak es in vo lv ed(rev oc at io n o f Kol lm an ’s li cen se an d asubs ta nt ia l m on et ary fin e) were hi gh , andKol lm an ’s def

en se s wer e m eri to rio us . Wha t t he Ju di ci al Offic er s ho ul d ha ve do ne , Kol lm anco nt en ds , is to ha ve tre at edth e Mo ti on eit he r: ( 1) as a
supp le m en t o r am en dm en t t o h is Ju ly 2, 20 07 ap pe al pe ti ti on , or (2 ) as a se pa rat e pe ti ti on to reo pe n t he pro ceed in gs pu rs ua ntto Ru le 1.1 46 (a)( 2) of t he Ru le s o f Prac ti ce. Insupp ort o f hi s p os it io n t ha t t he Ju di ci al Offic er s ho ul d h av e tr eat edth e Mo ti onto SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er as a m ot io n t o re op enth e 16pr oc eed in gs pu rs ua ntto Ru le of P ract ic e 1 .14 6( a)(2 ), Kol lm anrel ie s o n t he co urt’s

de ci si on in Veg- Mi x, In c. v. U.S. Dep t. o f Agr ic ul tu re, 8 32 F.2d60 1 (D.C . Cir
. 19 87 ). W e co nc lu de th atth e Ju di ci al Offic er d idno t ab us e h is di sc ret io n wh enhe fai le d t o t reatth e Mo ti onto SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er ei th er as a
supp le m en t o r am en dm en t t o h is Ju ly 2, 20 07 ap pe al pe ti ti on . Firs t, the Ju di ci al Offi cer h adalr eady

rul edth atKol lm an ’s Ju ne 26 , 20 07 let te r was hi s ap pe al pe ti ti on an d s ect io n 1 .14 5( a) o f th e Ru le s o f Prac ti ce, 7 C.F.R. § 1.1 45 (a), o nl y al lo ws fo r th e fi li ng of “ anap pe al pe ti ti on ,” i.e. on e ap pe al pe ti ti on . Seco nd , th e Mo ti onto SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er was fil edtwen ty-eig htda y s af te r th e ex pi rat io n o f th e al ready ex te nd edda te for

fil in g a n app eal pe ti ti on . Fin al ly,
an d p erh ap s m os t i m

po rtant ly, co un se l n ev er re qu es te d t ha t t he m ot io n b e tr eat ed
as eit he r a s up pl em en t o r am en dm en t t o Ko ll m an ’s app eal pe ti ti on . Ind eed , co un se l b as ic al ly ign or edth e fac t t ha t t he Ju di ci al Offic er h adalr eady rul edth atth e Ju ne 26 , 20 07 let te r was anap pe al pe ti ti on , att ach in g t he June 26 , 20 07 let te r to th e Mo ti onto SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er as Kol lm an ’s pro po se d An swe r to th e Co m pl ai nt . W e al so co nc lu de th atth e Ju di ci al Offic er d idno t ab us e h is di sc ret io n wh en he fai le d t o t reatth e Mo ti on to SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er as a se pa rat e 17pe ti ti on to reo pe n t he pro ceed in gs pu rs ua ntto Ru le 1.1 46 (a)( 2) . Rul e o f Prac ti ce

1.1 46 (a)( 2) is en ti tl ed“ [p ]etit io n t o re op enhe ari ng ” an d s ta te s: [a] pet it io n t o re op ena he ari ng to tak e fu rth er ev id en ce m ay be fil edat an y ti m e p rio r to th e is su an ce o f th e d eci si on of the Ju di ci al Offic er. Eve ry su ch pe ti ti on sh al l s ta te bri efl y th e n atur e an d p ur

po se of t he ev id en ce t o b e ad du ced , sh al l s ho w th atsu ch ev id en ce i s n otm erel y cu m ul at iv e, an d s ha ll setforth a go odreas on why su ch ev id en ce was no t ad du cedat t he he ari ng . 7 C .F.R. § 1 .14 6( a)(2 ). Neit he r th e ti tl e o f Kol lm an ’s do cu m en t n or , m or e im po rta nt ly, it s co nt en ts wou ldha ve pu t t he Ju di ci al Offic er o n n ot ic e th atth e Mo ti onto SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er was , infact , a reque stth atth e pr oc eed in gs be reo pe ne d p ur su an t t o R ul e o f Prac ti ce 1 .14 6( a)(2 ). Mo reo ve r, ev enif t he Ju di ci al Offic er h aderre d i n fa il in g t o c on si de r th at
m ot io n a s a m ot io n t o re op enth e p ro ceed in gs pu rs ua ntto Ru le of P ract ic e 1.1 46 (a)( 2) , we con cl ud e th e err orwas h arm le ss an d d idno t v io la te Kol lm an ’s du e pr oc es s ri gh ts . A requ es t t o re op enpro ceed in gs pu rs uantto Ru le of P ract ic e 1.1 46 (a)( 2) “ sh al l s etforth a go odreas onwhy su ch ev id en ce was no t ad du cedat th e h eari ng .” 7 C .F.R. § 1 .14 6( a)(2 ). Here, n on e o f th e ev id en ce at ta ch edto th e Mo ti onto SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si on an d Ord er was ne w evi de nc e an d Ko ll m an ’s 2

T h e e x h i b i t s a t t a c h e d t o t h e M o t i o n t o S e t A s i d e D e f a u l t D e c i s i o n w e r e a s 2 f o l l o w s : ( 1 ) E x h i b i t A
- t h e p a p e r w o r k t r a n s f e r r i n g t h e t w o l i o n s d a t e d S e p t e m b e r 1 9 , 2 0 0 0 ; ( 2 ) E x h i b i t B
- K o l l m a n ’ s A p p l i c a t i o n t o U S D A f o r l i c e n s e d a t e d J a n u a r y 6 , 2 0 0 6 ; ( 3 ) E x h i b i t C
- J a n u a r y 1 8 , 2 0 0 6 l e t t e r f r o m U S D A t o K o l l m a n a p p r o v i n g h i m f o r a l i c e n s e 18Mo ti ondi d n otsetforth a “ go odreas on why su ch ev id en ce was no t ad du ced ”

earl ie r in th e p ro ceed in gs . Ins te ad , Kol lm ansi m pl y st at ed“ [t]ha t t hi s m ot io n i s br ou gh t upo n t he ba si s o f ex cu sabl e n eg le ctan d s ev eral m eri to rio us de fen se s t o the Co m pl ai nthe rei n.” Mo ti on to SetAsi de Defau ltDeci si onan d Ord er, ¶ 5
. Pres um ab ly the ba si s o f ex cu sabl e n eg le ctwas t ha t Ko ll m anha d o rig in al ly been pr o s e , a factwhi ch we fin d d oe s n otco ns ti tu te a “ go odreas on ” fo r a l at e fi li ng . See Veg -Mi x, In c., 83 2 F .2dat 6 09 (ho ld in g tha t o ne of t he requi rem en ts for al lo win g apro ceed in g t o b e reo pe ne d u nd er Ru le of P ract ic e 1 .14 6( a)(2 ) is th atth e pa rty giv e a g oo d re as on forth e la te fil in g)
. Nex t we ad dr es s Ko ll m an ’s arg um en t t ha t t he Ju di ci al Offic er ab us edhi s di sc ret io n wh enhe rev ok edKol lm an ’s AWA li cen se . Kol lm anarg ue s t ha t ev enif de em edadm it te d, t he all eg at io ns in th e Co m pl ai ntdi d n otsupp ort a f

in di ng of

“ wil lfu ln es s” as r equi redun de r 5 U.S.C . §5 58 (c) a ndth eref or e, he was e nt it le d t o
no ti ce an d a n o pp ortu ni ty to ac hi ev e co m pl ia nc e b efo re h is li cen se co ul d b e
rev ok ed . Not ab ly, th e USDA arg ue d tha t Ko ll m anwaiv edth is arg um en t b y fai li ng to pre se ntitto th e Ju di ci al Offic er. Lib eral ly con st ru in g Ko ll m an ’s Ju ne 26 , 20 07 le tt er, wh ic h was fil edwhi le Kol lm anwas pr o s e an d wh ic h was tre at edby the

u n d e r t h e A W A ; a n d ( 4 ) E x h i b i t D
- K o l l m a n ’ s J u n e 2 6 , 2 0 0 7 l e t t e r t o A L J D a v e n p o r t w h i c h w a s t r e a t e d b y t h e J u d i c i a l O f f i c e r a s K o l l m a n ’ s A p p e a l P e t i t i o n . 19Ju di ci al Offic er as anap pe al of t he ALJ’s Deci si on , we fin d t ha t t he let te r can be

readto ha ve rai se d t he arg um en t b efo re the Ju di ci al Offic er tha t Ko ll m an ’s con du ct wit h re sp ectto th e li on s an d h is act in g a s a d eal er wi th ou t a l ic en se was n otwil lfu l
an d s o h e sh ou ldno t h av e h adhi s l ic en se rev ok ed . See J un e 2 6, 2 00 7 l et te r (“ [s ]o I
as k p le as e co ns id er thi s I n ev er wi ll fu ll y act edon whatI am

accu se d o f.”). 5 U.S.C. § 55 8( c) p ro vi de s i n re le va ntpa rt: [e]xce ptin cas es of wi ll fu ln es s o r th os e in whi ch publ ic he al th , in te res t, o r sa fet y

requi res ot he rwis e, th e wit hd rawal , su sp en si on , rev oc at io n, o r an nu lm en t o f a l ic en se is lawf ul on ly if, bef

or e th e in st itut io n o f ag en cy

pro ceed in gs th eref

or , th e li cen se e h as be en gi ve n- - (1 ) no ti ce b y

th e Age nc y

in writ in g o f th e fac ts or c on du ctwhi ch m ay warra ntth e act io n; an d (2 ) op po rtu ni ty to d em on st rat e o r ach ie ve co m pl ia nc e wit h a ll lawf

ul requi rem en ts . Id . A vio la ti on is wil lfu l u nd er thi s s ub se ct io n “ ‘if a pr oh ib it edactis do ne in te nt io na ll y , irre sp ect iv e o f ev il in te nt , or d on e wit h c arel es s d is reg ardof s ta tu to ry requi rem en ts ’. ” Co os em an s Sp eci al ti es , Inc . v. U.S. Dept . of Ag ric ul tu re, 4 82 F.3 d 5 60 , 56 7( D.C. Cir .), cert . den ie d, 1 28 S.Ct . 62 8, 1 69 L.Ed.2d39 4 (2 00 7) , qu ot in g, Fi ne r Fo od s Sa le s C o., In c. v. Bl oc k, 7 08 F.2d77 4, 7 78 (D.C. Cir . 19 83 ); Po ta to Sal es Co ., Inc . v. U.S. Dept . of Ag ric ul tu re, 9 2 F .3d80 0, 8 05 (9 Cir . 19 96 ) th (s am e). Fo r a rev oc at io n o f li cen se to be au th or iz ed , on ly one of the vi ol at io ns ne ed
20be wil lfu l; th e g ov ern m en t n eedno t s ho w th atall of t he vi ol at io ns were wi ll fu l.

Co x v . U.S. Dept . of Ag ric ul tu re, 9 25 F.2d11 02 , 11 05 (8 Cir .), cert . den ie d, 5 02 th U.S. 86 0, 1 12 S.Ct . 17 8, 1 16 L.Ed.2d14 1 (1 99 1)
. The Ju di ci al Offic er fo un d, b y vi rtu e o f Kol lm an ’s fai lu re t o a ns wer o r ot he rwis e res po ndto th e Co m pl ai ntas r equi redun de r th e Ru le s o f Prac ti ce, tha t Kol lm anha d a dm it te d a ll of the m at eri al all eg at io ns in th e Co m pl ai nt , in cl ud in g th athi s re le va ntco nduc t was wil lfu l. We hav e al read y co nc lu de d tha t t hi s fi nd in g by the Ju di ci al Offic er was co rrec t. Acco rd in gl y , th e Ju di ci al Offic er d idno t err whe n h e fo un d Ko ll m an ’s var io us vi ol at io ns of t he Sta nd ard s an d R eg ul at io ns were wil lfu l an d re vo ke d Ko ll m an ’s li cen se witho utgi vi ng hi m anop po rtu ni ty to cu re. Fi na ll y , we ackno wled ge Kol lm an ’s cit at io ns to cas es wher ei n d efau lt de ci si on s i ss ue d b y

th e USDA an d o th er adm in is tra ti ve ag en ci es were v acat edon ap pe al ba se d upo n ju di ci al de te rm in at io n t ha t und er the fact s o f th os e cas es th e de fau ltde ci si on s wer e fu nd am en ta ll y un fai r. Insupp ort o f hi s fu nd am en ta l u nf ai rn es s ar gu m en t, Ko ll m ancit es pri m ari ly to Ober st ar v . FDIC, 9 87 F.2d49 4, 5 04 (8 Cir . 19 93 ) an d Li onRai si ns , Inc . v. th U.S. Dept . Agri c., Cas e No. CV- F-0 4- 58 44 (E.D. Ca. May 12 , 20 05 ). Thes e de ci si on s, h owe ve r, are d is ti ng ui sh ab le . Firs t, the cas es were i n c om pl et el y di ffer en t p ro cedur al po stur es th anth e in st an t ca se . The d efau ltde ci si onat i ss ue in
21Obe rs ta r cam e aft er the pa rti es ha d a lre ady li ti ga te d s ub st an ti ve is su es in a rel at ed
cas e, an d wer e awai ti ng anap pe ll at e ru li ng . The d efau ltde ci si onin Lio n R ai si ns
cam e aft er a s ub st an ti ve m ot io n t o d is m is s h adbe enfil edan d the cas e in vo lv ed pa rti es with wh om

a se co ndact io n was alr ead y pe nd in g a ndwas b ei ng vi go ro us ly de fen de d b y

Lio n R ai si ns . Ind eed , inbo th cas es th e co urts em ph as iz edth ei r di sp le as ur e wit h t he ag en ci es ’ at te m ptto “ en d ru n” aro un d t he m eri ts of t he cas e wit h p ro cedur al m an eu ve rs . This si m pl y was n otth e p os tu re o f th e in st an t ca se , whe re the cas e sa t i dl e wit h re sp ectto Kol lm anforalm os t t wo years u nt il th e ALJ jum p- st art editwith a su a s

po nt e m ot io n t o s ho w cau se why th e co m pl ai ntsh ou ld
no t b e d is m is se d a ndst ric ke n fr om th e d oc ke t fo r fai lu re t o t ak e fu rth er ac ti on in th e cas e. Seco nd , inbo th Ober st ar an d Li on Rai si ns , th e co urts em ph as iz edth atgo od
cau se ha d b een sh own forth e la te fil in g o f th e res po nd en ts ’ an swe rs su ch th atth e
ren de rin g o f th e d efau ltde ci si on was u nf ai r. Inco nt ras t, Ko ll m andi d n otest ab li sh go odcau se forth e in su ffi ci en cy of h is res po ns e to th e Co m pl ai ntwhi ch in cl ud ed
ne it he r de ni al s n orde fen se s ev enaft er h e h adbe engi ve n e xp li ci t d ire ct io ns as t o ho w to res po ndto th e co m pl ai ntan d t he co ns eque nc es of afai lu re t o fo ll ow s ai d di rect io ns . Nor d idKol lm anpro vi de go odcau se forhi s fa il ur e to ti m el y pro ffer
ev id en ce i n a n a tt em

ptto de m on st rat e h is in no cen ce o f th e ch arg es .

22The bo tt om li ne is th atin qu iry in t he se types of c as es is factin te ns iv e. Upo n
rev ie w of t he ov eral l fa irn es s o f th e p ro ceed in gs in th is cas e, th e Ju di ci al Offic er’s Deci si on an d Ord er d idno t v io la te th e p rin ci pl es of f un da m en ta l fa irn es s embod ie d in th e Due Pro ces s C laus e o f th e Fi fth Am en dm en t t o t he Uni te d S ta te s Co ns ti tu ti on , th e Adm in is tra ti ve Pro cedur e Act , th e AWA, andth e USDA’s own
ru le s. Alt ho ug h we a ffi rm th e d eci si on of t he Ju di ci al Offic er, we m us t s ay th atth e act io ns of t he ag en cy

were n otab ov e rep ro ach . In fa ct , th ey were v irtua ll y

gl aci al
an d h ard ly repre se nt“be stpra ct ic e” b y a go ve rn m en t ag en cy . The Co m pl ai ntwas
no t fi le d u nt il Apri l 2 9, 2 00 5, ap pr ox im at el y fiv e y ears aft er the all eg edvi ol at io ns pe rta in in g t o t he two li on s. Ko ll m anfil edhi s re sp on se to th e Co m pl ai nton Ju ly 22 , 20 05 . There aft er, n o a ct io n was tak enby the ag en cy with re sp ectto Kol lm an
un ti l M arch 1, 2 00 7 wh enitwas p res en te d wi th a Feb ru ary 1, 2 00 7 su a s po nt e
or de r fro m

th e ALJ. The ord er co m m an de d t he Agen cy

to sh ow caus e why the act io n s ho ul d n otbe di sm is se d a ndstric ke n fr om th e d oc ke t fo r fai lu re t o t ak e fu rth er ac ti on in th e cas e. Onl y th endi d t hi s ca se be gi n t o m ov e al on g t he jud ic ia l pa th , with t he Deci si on an d Ord er fi na ll y fil edby the Ju di ci al Offic er o n Oct ob er 2 , 20 07 , m or e th ansev eny ears aft er the co nduc t re la te d t o t he two li on s o ccu rred
. IV. CONCLUSION

23Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we af firm th e Ju di ci al Offic er’s Oct ob er 2 , 20 07 Deci si on an d Ord er. AFFIR MED.

24