Opinion ID: 556487
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The ALJ's Determination Beyond the Per Se Standard

Text: 30 The ALJ also found Windy City unfit for inspection services independent of the per se rule. The JO observed that: 31 The ALJ properly determined that even if all of the mitigating circumstances presented by respondent [Windy City] at the hearing are considered, respondent is still, nonetheless, unfit to engage in any business requiring inspection services and unfit to receive Federal Meat grading and acceptance services. 32 Decision and Order at 18. This is in accord with USDA policy of making non-per se rule determinations in such cases. Great American Veal, 45 Agric.Dec. at 1850. Petitioner contends, however, that the per se determination so overpowered the decision-making process that this observation cannot be taken at face value. Petitioner's Br. at 22. In other words, the ALJ was unable to evaluate the evidence before him in an unbiased manner because the per se rule skewed his perception of the facts. 33 This contention is implausible here. We review the agency's factual findings under the substantial evidence test and conclusions of law under the arbitrary and capricious standard, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 706(2)(A), (E) (1988), and we cannot say that the determination of unfitness was incorrect. The pattern of bribery over an extended period of time gave the ALJ and JO clear indication that Windy City presents a threat to public health and safety. The bribes took place as early as 1984, evolved into a practice that the Department believed to merit investigation and resulted in an undercover investigation that demonstrated bribery to be a recurring practice at Windy City. While Sacks's personal history, reputation in the community and rehabilitation are potentially mitigating, the ALJ and JO were justified in concluding that these factors do not overpower the risk to the public of permitting a company with a history like Windy City's to continue receiving federal services. 34 In addition, there is no indication that the hearing officers possessed a closed mind to potentially mitigating factors. Respondent's brief describes the lengths to which the ALJ went in admitting evidence that attempted to justify the bribery offense, that reflected favorably on Sacks's character and background and that described the importance of Windy City to the community. Respondent's Br. at 21-22. There is simply little to indicate that the ALJ or JO approached the non-per se analysis with a mindset impermissibly tainted by the per se rule. 35 Finally, the USDA's strong position that individuals convicted of bribery-related offenses during their employment are generally unfit does not demonstrate the unalterably closed mind that would make the hearing a sham. See FTC v. Cement Institute, 333 U.S. 683, 700-03, 68 S.Ct. 793, 803-05, 92 L.Ed. 1010 (1948) (even pre-hearing belief of commissioners in illegality of trade practice did not mean that [their] minds ... were irrevocably closed on the subject). Even if the ALJ here entered the hearing believing that the law required withdrawal for a felony conviction, Windy City had full opportunity to demonstrate why the felonies should not lead to automatic denial of services. We do not hold that the per se rule could never taint such a determination. However, the ALJ's non-per se determination here shows no evident sign of being tainted by the per se rule, and substantial evidence in Windy City's business history justifies the ALJ's and JO's decisions. 36