With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". knowingly and willfully violated the Act. 2 . We granted judgment for the defendant (by reversing the district court’s judgment without remanding). 3 . Legi-Tech does not dispute that if it waived the separation of powers claim, the waiver would constitute an independent ground for denying retroactive application of NRA. See Reynoldsville Casket Co. v. Hyde,-U.S.-,-, 115 S.Ct. 1745, 1751, 131 L.Ed.2d 820 (1995). 4 . The FEC also argues, with some force, that the Commission's actions here were only voidable, not void, because the ex officio members could not vote even though they may have influenced the voting Commissioners. As a voidable decision, prejudice must be shown. See Professional Air Traffic Controllers Org. v. Federal Labor Relations Auth., 685 F.2d 547, 564 (D.C.Cir.1982) (<HOLDING>); NRA, 6 F.3d at 826-27 (the non-voting ex

A: holding that chevron deference is due only when the agency acts pursuant to delegated authority and the agency action has the force of law
B: holding that a draft of a proposed letter from an area director of a government agency to a municipal administrative agency was properly excluded because it did not represent an agency finding
C: holding that a defendant must make a colorable showing that an ex parte communication occurred
D: holding that illegal ex parte contacts with an agency only make agency action voidable so prejudice must be shown
D.