Opinion ID: 656190
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: standard of review

Text: 10 We review the district court's grant of summary judgment de novo to determine whether there are any genuine issues of material fact. Norfolk Energy, Inc. v. Hodel, 898 F.2d 1435, 1439 (9th Cir.1990). In making this determination, we view the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Id. In the context of reviewing a decision of an administrative agency, de novo review means that we view the case from the same position as the district court. Marathon Oil Co. v. United States, 807 F.2d 759, 765 (9th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 940, 107 S.Ct. 1593, 94 L.Ed.2d 782 (1987). 11 A decision of an administrative agency must be set aside if the action was 'arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law' or if the action failed to meet statutory, procedural, or constitutional requirements. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 414, 91 S.Ct. 814, 822, 28 L.Ed.2d 136 (1971) (quoting 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)). In determining whether an action is arbitrary or capricious, we consider whether the decision was based on a consideration of the relevant factors and whether there has been a clear error of judgment. Id. at 416, 91 S.Ct. at 823-24. An agency's interpretation of its own regulations controls unless it is  'plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation[s].'  Marathon Oil, 807 F.2d at 765 (quoting Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 325 U.S. 410, 414, 65 S.Ct. 1215, 1217, 89 L.Ed. 1700 (1945)). 3