The agency’s “staff has no basis to prejudge the administrative process. For one, JGW is not a recalcitrant party, having already provided over 40,000 documents and hearing testimony of multiple employees in response to earlier Bureau requests,” Celestin wrote in court papers. “And even if the parties are unable to negotiate the parameters of a response to a new CID—not a foregone conclusion—JGW has a statutory right to petition the director to modify or set aside the CID.”
Copyright The National Law Journal. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
