Laserfiche WebLink
- 3 - <br /> 1) In the first case, ACTEB appealed this matter <br /> to the OALJs and this case was docketed as Case No. 83-CTA-62 . <br /> On August 25 , 1988 , the ALJ issued a Decision and Order affirming <br /> the determination of the Regional Grant Officer that the amount <br /> of $153 , 939 . 69 was due and owing to the Department. The <br /> Secretary declined to review ACTEB' s appeal and the ALJ ' s <br /> Decision and Order became the final agency action of the <br /> Department. <br /> 2) In the second case, ACTEB also appealed the <br /> Final Determination to the OAIJs and the case was docketed as <br /> Case No. 83-CTA-208 . On April 6, 1989 , the ALJ issued a Decision <br /> and Order affirming the determination of the Regional Grant <br /> Officer and finding that the Grant Officer properly disallowed <br /> $27 , 181 . 00. ACTEB did not appeal the decision and, thus, the <br /> debt of $27 , 181 . 00 became the final decision of the Secretary of <br /> Labor, and due and owing to the United States . <br /> 3 ) On September 27 , 1990 , the U. S . District <br /> Court for the Northern District of California entered summary <br /> judgment for the United States in the sum of $183 , 068 . 79 <br /> principal plus accrued interest. United States of America v . <br /> Alameda County Training and Employment Board, Case No. 0-89-3074 <br /> JPV. This matter is now on appeal to the United States Court of <br /> Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in United States of America v . <br /> Alameda County Training and Employment Board, Case No. 90-16476 <br /> (9th Cir. ) . <br />