Grier v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development, 418 U.S. App. D.C. 185 (2015)

Citation: Grier v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development, 418 U.S. App. D.C. 185 (2015)
Parent Document: Grier v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development, 418 U.S. App. D.C. 185 (2015)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2015-07-14
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2816866/grier-v-united-states-departmen... ↗

Full Text

1,091 chars

In response, petitioners point to the date on the Certificate
of Service*, May 29, 2013, i.e., one day after the date of the
Secretary’s order. They argue that this date should be the date
on which the “entry” of the Secretary’s order was made, and
consequently the petition for review was timely filed. In support
of their position, petitioners cite our decision in Energy Probe
v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm’n, 872 F.2d 436 (D.C. Cir.
1989). In that case, we noted that pursuant to the Hobbs Act, 28
U.S.C. § 2341 et seq., a party may appeal a final order of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) within 60 days of the
“entry” of the final order. We held that under the Hobbs Act,
“the date of ‘entry’ . . . is the date on which the agency’s final
decision is signed and served.” 872 F.2d at 438 (emphasis
added). Petitioners argue that in this case, although the order
itself was signed on May 28, 2013, the date they were “served”
was the date of the Certificate of Service, i.e., May 29, 2013,
and consequently that date should be the date on which the 20-
day time limit commenced.

Other Sections in This Document (46)

Full Text