United States Fourth Circuit

The Information Quality Act (IQA) does not create any legal right to information or its correctness. Dismissal of plaintiff's suit brought under the IQA claiming that defendant-agency secretary had denied them their legal right to accurate information involving sodium consumption is affirmed where plaintiffs lacked Article III standing for the suit.

Appellate Information

• Argued 02/02/2006
• Decided 03/06/2006
• Published 03/06/2006

Judges

• Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Catherine E. Stetson, Hogan & Hartson, L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Appellants.  Alisa Beth Klein, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division, Appellate Section, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Stephen A. Bokat, Robert Costagliola, National Chamber Litigation Center, Inc., Washington, D.C.;  Reed Rubinstein, Mark E. Solomons, Greenberg Traurig, Washington, D.C., for Appellants.  Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney, Mark B. Stern, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division, Appellate Section, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.  Richard S. Silverman, Gregory G. Garre, Dirk C. Phillips, Hogan & Hartson, L.L.P., Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae Grocery Manufacturers of America Supporting Appellants.  Thomas J. Ward, National Association of Home Builders, Washington, D.C.;  Karl S. Bourdeau, Gus B. Bauman, Leah A. Dundon, Beveridge & Diamond, P.C., Washington, D.C., for Amicus Curiae National Association of Home Builders Supporting Appellants.