Skip to main content
Find a Lawyer

United States Supreme Court

Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, 13-1041

In this case, in 2006 the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division (the Department) issued an opinion letter finding that mortgage-loan officers fell within the administrative except to overtime pay requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), and in 2010 the Department withdrew the 2006 opinion letter without notice or an opportunity to comment and issued an Administrator's Interpretation concluding that mortgage-loan officers do not qualify for the administrative exception. Respondent filed suit contending that the Administrator's Interpretation was procedurally invalid under the D.C. Circuit's decision in Paralyzed Veterans of Am. v. D.C. Arena L.P, which holds that an agency must use the Administrative Procedure Act's (APA) notice-and-comment procedures when it wishes to issue a new interpretation of a regulation that deviates significantly from a previously adopted interpretation. The district court granted summary judgment to the Department, but the D.C. Circuit applied Paralyzed Veterans and reversed. The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, where: 1) the Paralyzed Veterans doctrine is contrary to the clear test of the APA's rule making provisions and improperly imposes on agencies an obligation beyond the APA's maximum procedural requirements; and 2) APA section 4 specifically exempts interpretive rules from notice-and-comment requirements.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 03/09/2015
  • Published 03/09/2015


  • Sotomayor


  • United States Supreme Court


Copied to clipboard