made when partial summary judgment was granted to Ford, Fisher pointed to a letter written by NHTSA General Counsel Frank Spears to the Parents for Safer Air Bags. The letter appears to be undated, but indicates that it is a response to that group’s letter of September 23, 1998. In it, Spears writes that “[t]he standard [208] did not prohibit vehicle manufacturers from placing other accurate information concerning air bags or seat belts in locations in the vehicle other than the sun visor.” The district court’s denial of a motion for new trial did not comment on this matter. Nevertheless, its denial of the motion should be upheld. First, the General Counsel’s opinion is not legally binding on the courts. See Chambers v. Ohio Dep’t of Human Servs., 145 F.3d 793, 803 (6th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>) (quoting Management Recruiters Int’l, Inc. v.
holding that deference is owed to an agencys interpretation of its own categorical exclusion regulations so long as that interpretation is not plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation holding that under a due weight deference standard a more reasonable interpretation overcomes an agency interpretation holding that when an agency has not cemented its interpretation in the form of binding regulations its interpretation may not be entitled to de facto binding effect through judicial deference holding that an agencys interpretation of its own regulations is entitled to deference holding that agency interpretation which is reasonable is entitled to deference