Summary of a Recent
Judicial Development in
Administrative Law

Petition Seeking to Modify Raisin Marketing Order Dismissed
for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Eric H. Foy
National AgLaw Center Research Associate

Summary of Decision

In Horne v. United States Department of Agriculture, No. 1:08-CV-00402 OWW SMS, 2008 WL 4911438 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 13, 2008) the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California granted the United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The plaintiffs sought an exemption from or modification of the Raisin Marketing Order, issued pursuant to the Agriculture Marketing Agreement Act (AMAA). The court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiffs' complaint was not timely filed according to the requirements of the AMAA.

Background

In March 2007, the plaintiffs, individuals and entities involved in business related to the raisin industry, filed an administrative petition pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 608c(15)(A), requesting a modification of or exemption from the Raisin Marketing Order. Id. at *1. The USDA moved to dismiss the petition for lack of standing. Id. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denied the USDA's motion; however, on February 4, 2008, a Judicial Officer (JO) vacated the ALJ's decision and dismissed the petition. Id. The plaintiffs filed the instant appeal claiming their counsel did not receive the JO's decision until March 4, 2008, raising due process concerns. Id.

Arguments

The USDA argued that the instant court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiffs' complaint, filed March 18, 2008, because it was not filed within 20 days following the date of entry of the JO's ruling as required by the AMAA. Id.

The plaintiffs conceded that the complaint was not timely filed pursuant to the AMAA, but they argued that due process considerations justified the tardy filing. Id. Alternatively, the plaintiffs alleged the court had jurisdiction pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 702, or the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1364. Id.

Analysis and Holdings

The plaintiffs brought the instant action under 7 U.S.C. § 608c(15)(B), which provides the following:

The District Courts of the United States . . . in any district in which such handler is an inhabitant, or has his principal place of business, are hereby vested with jurisdiction in equity to review such ruling, provided a bill in equity for that purpose is filed within twenty days from the date of the entry of such ruling. Service of process in such proceedings may be had upon the Secretary by delivering to him a copy of the bill of complaint. If the court determines that such ruling is not in accordance with law, it shall remand such proceedings to the Secretary with directions either (1) to make such ruling as the court shall determine to be in accordance with law, or (2) to take such further proceedings as, in its opinion, the law requires . . . .

Although the plaintiffs' petition was not filed until 43 days after the entry of the JO's ruling, the plaintiffs argued that the twenty-day time limit should be computed from some later date. Id. at *2. The AMAA is clear that the mechanism governing judicial review of a ruling on a petition to modify a marketing order requires that the petition must be filed within twenty days of the date of entry. Id. Additionally, the plaintiffs could not establish independent jurisdiction under the APA because 5 U.S.C. § 702 specifically limits the government's waiver of sovereign immunity by denying courts the "authority to grant relief if any other statute that grants consent to suit expressly or impliedly forbids the relief which is sought." Id. (citing 5 U.S.C. § 702). Under 7 U.S.C. § 608c(15)(A), the plaintiffs could not be granted the relief sought because the action was not timely filed. Id. The court held that it was not in a position to revise the twenty-day rule even though due process concerns may have been implicated. Id. at *2.

The case was decided on November 13, 2008.