Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians v. Merrick Garland
5:24-cv-00379
C.D. Cal.Nov 15, 2024Background
- The case arises from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) notifying Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians of alleged PACT Act violations on October 19, 2023.
- ATF informed the Tribe it would be placed on the PACT Act Non-Compliant List effective November 20, 2023, but subsequently delayed this action amid settlement negotiations.
- On January 30, 2024, ATF entered a settlement with the Tribe's business partner, agreeing to further delay the placement pending federal court review.
- Plaintiff moved to strike extra-record materials created after October 19, 2023, arguing they were not part of the administrative record at the time of the purported final agency action.
- The dispute centers on whether the October 19, 2023, letter was the "final agency action" for purposes of judicial review under the APA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| What was the final agency action date? | October 19, 2023 letter was final agency action. | January 30, 2024 settlement marked ongoing deliberations. | October 19, 2023 letter was final agency action. |
| Scope of judicial review under APA | Court should only consider the record as of October 19, 2023. | Post-October 19 events are part of agency's ongoing process. | Only pre-October 19, 2023 record is reviewed. |
| Effect of settlement and delays | Delays post-final action are not ongoing deliberations, just enforcement stays. | Settlement shows no true finality until January 2024. | Subsequent delays did not alter finality. |
| Striking extra-record materials | Records post-dating October 19, 2023, must be stricken from judicial review. | These materials show agency process and should remain considered. | Extra-record materials are stricken. |
Key Cases Cited
- Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n of U.S., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29 (agency actions upheld on basis articulated by agency)
- Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. 154 (final agency action cannot be tentative or interlocutory)
- Oregon Nat. Desert Ass'n v. U.S. Forest Serv., 465 F.3d 977 (decision must impose obligation/fix legal relationship to be final)
- Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Haaland, 58 F.4th 412 (pragmatic approach to agency finality)
- San Francisco Herring Ass'n v. Dep't of the Interior, 946 F.3d 564 (ongoing deliberations do not constitute final agency action)