United States Ninth Circuit

In a suit regarding the transfer of a sugar marketing allocation, summary judgment for USDA and the purported transferee is reversed where: 1) the disputed provisions of the Agricultural Adjustment Act are unambiguous, thus the district court erred in granting Chevron deference to the interpretation advanced by the USDA; 2) the Act requires the USDA to eliminate a processor's sugar marketing allocation when the processor has permanently terminated operations; 3) the purported transferor permanently terminated operations prior to and not in conjunction with the purported sale of assets to defendant; and 4) therefore, the USDA erred in approving the transfer of the allocation to defendant, and the allocation must be redistributed pro rata among all processors.

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/11/2009
• Published 02/11/2009

Judges

• Before:  J. CLIFFORD WALLACE, STEPHEN S. TROTT and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Kevin J. Brosch, DTB Associates, LLP, Washington, DC, for plaintiff-appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Jeffrey Kahn, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, DC;  Joanne P. Rodriguez, Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorney's Office, Boise, ID, for defendant-appellee., David P. Bundle and Sarah C.S. McLaren, Fredrikson & Byron, PA, Minneapolis, MN, for intervenor-appellee.