Administrative-Aftermarket Brake Modules-“Steady Burning” Definition-Finality of Agency Action

Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of their action against USDOT and the NHTSA. Plaintiffs distributed aftermarket brake modules that caused rear brake lights to flash repeatedly before staying steady bright. Defendants issued letters to plaintiffs determining that their modules failed to comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards requiring “steady burning” brake lights. Plaintiffs filed suit seeking injunctive relief, but the district court dismissed the case sua sponte, concluding that defendants’ actions did not constitute a final agency action.

Where defendants’ notices left nothing more for the agencies to decide and where legal consequences could flow from noncompliance in the form of fines against plaintiffs, the notices constituted final agency actions.

Kobes, J., dissenting: “I agree that the July 26 NHTSA letters to the Distributors are the agency’s “last word” on whether Pulse Modules violate FMVSS 108, so the first part of the Bennett test is met. Supra at 5 (quoting Whitman v. Am. Trucking Ass’ns, 531 U.S. 457, 478 (2001)); see Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. 154, 177 (1997). But the second is not.”

Judgment is reversed and remanded.

Brake Plus NWA, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Transportation (MLW No. 84783/Case No. 24-2951 – 11 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, Grasz, J.) Appealed from U.S. District Court, Western District of Arkansas, Brooks, J. (Jeremy Joseph Broggi, Washington, D.C. for appellants; Marshall S. Ney, Rogers, AR; Katherine Church Campbell, Rogers, AR; Stephen J. Obermeier, Washington, D.C.; and Bradshaw Rost, Chevy Chase, MD on the brief) (Casen Ross, formerly with the U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. for appellees)