Connection lost
Server error
UNITED STATES v. NOVA SCOTIA FOOD PRODUCTS CORP. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A food safety regulation was invalidated because the FDA failed to disclose the scientific data it relied on and did not adequately respond to industry comments that the rule was commercially unworkable during the rulemaking process.
Legal Significance: This case establishes that for informal rulemaking to be valid, an agency must disclose the scientific data it relies upon and provide a reasoned response to material comments, particularly concerning a rule’s commercial feasibility, to avoid arbitrary and capricious action.
UNITED STATES v. NOVA SCOTIA FOOD PRODUCTS CORP. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), concerned about botulism, engaged in informal “notice-and-comment” rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to establish safety regulations for processing hot-smoked fish. The resulting regulation mandated specific time-temperature-salinity (T-T-S) parameters. Nova Scotia Food Products Corp. and other fish processors submitted comments arguing that the proposed T-T-S requirements were not commercially feasible for whitefish, as they would render the product unsaleable. The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries also objected, suggesting alternative methods. In promulgating the final rule, the FDA did not disclose the scientific studies or data it used to determine the T-T-S parameters. Furthermore, its “concise general statement of basis and purpose” did not respond to the significant comments regarding commercial feasibility or the viability of alternative processing methods. When the government brought an enforcement action to enjoin Nova Scotia from violating the regulation, Nova Scotia challenged the regulation’s validity on procedural grounds.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did the Food and Drug Administration act in an arbitrary and capricious manner by promulgating a regulation through informal rulemaking without disclosing the scientific data upon which it relied and without adequately responding to significant comments regarding the regulation’s commercial feasibility?
Yes. The regulation was promulgated in an arbitrary manner and is invalid Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui offic
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Did the Food and Drug Administration act in an arbitrary and capricious manner by promulgating a regulation through informal rulemaking without disclosing the scientific data upon which it relied and without adequately responding to significant comments regarding the regulation’s commercial feasibility?
Conclusion
This case is a foundational administrative law precedent that enhances the procedural Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea
Legal Rule
Under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553, an agency engaged Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore e
Legal Analysis
The court first determined that the FDA had the statutory authority under Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The FDA has statutory authority under the FDCA’s “insanitary conditions” clause
