Opinion

Jason Boyd v. Department of the Interior

Court: Merit Systems Protection Board
Filed: May 26, 2026
Status: Unpublished
Cited by: 0 cases
Authority: More cited than 40.7%

holding that the appellant surrendered his right to appeal to the Board when he petitioned another agency, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, for review

How later courts described this case

holding that the appellant surrendered his right to appeal to the Board when he petitioned another agency, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, for review

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

JASON BOYD, DOCKET NUMBER

Appellant, CH-0752-19-0297-I-5

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, DATE: May 26, 2026

Agency.

THIS FINAL ORDER IS NONPRECEDENTIAL 1

Jason Boyd , Saginaw, Texas, pro se.

Chen Song and Gregory Eyler , Washington, D.C., for the agency.

BEFORE

Henry J. Kerner, Vice Chairman

James J. Woodruff II, Member

FINAL ORDER

The appellant has filed a petition for review of the initial decision, which

sustained his removal under 5 U.S.C. chapter 75. For the reasons discussed below,

we DISMISS the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction.

A nonprecedential order is one that the Board has determined does not add significantly

to the body of MSPB case law. Parties may cite nonprecedential orders, but such orders

have no precedential value; the Board and administrative judges are not required to

follow or distinguish them in any future decisions. In contrast, a precedential decision

issued as an Opinion and Order has been identified by the Board as significantly

contributing to the Board’s case law. See 5 C.F.R. § 1201.117(c).

BACKGROUND

The appellant was a Park Ranger whom the agency removed from service

based on various conduct- and attendance-related charges. Boyd v. Department of

the Interior, MSPB Docket No. CH-0752-19-0297-I-I, Initial Appeal File , Tab 10

at 24-33. The appellant filed a Board appeal, and after a hearing, the administrative

judge issued an initial decision sustaining the removal. Boyd v. Department of the

Interior, MSPB Docket No. CH-0752-19-0297-I-5, Appeal File, Tab 88, Initial

Decision (ID). The administrative judge notified the appellant that the initial

decision would become the final decision of the Board unless the appellant filed a

petition for review no later than February 13, 2024. ID at 51.

After the finality date passed, on March 12, 2024, the appellant filed a

request for an extension of time to file his petition, explaining that certain medical

conditions and difficulties with the Board’s e-Appeal system had prevented him

from filing on time. Petition for Review (PFR) File, Tab 1. The Clerk of the Board

denied the appellant’s request because he did not file it prior to the due date for the

filing of a petition for review. PFR File, Tab 2; see 5 C.F.R § 1201.114(f).

On April 19, 2024, the appellant filed a petition for review with the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Boyd v. Department of the Interior,

No. 2024-1715 (Fed. Cir. Filed Apr. 19, 2024). On July 30, 2024, the court

transferred the appellant’s case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District

of Ohio on the basis that it lacks jurisdiction to consider a petition for review of the

appellant’s mixed-case appeal. Id. (order transferring case).

While his district court appeal was still pending, the appellant filed a petition

for review with the Board, along with a motion to waive the filing deadline. PFR

File, Tabs 3, 7. He states that he is not contesting the initial decision but is instead

attempting to obtain written hearing transcripts. PFR File, Tab 7 at 5. The agency

has responded to the petition for review, and the appellant has filed a reply (as well

as a correction to his reply) to the agency’s response. PFR File, Tabs 8-10.

ANALYSIS

The appellant filed his petition for review more than 1 year after the deadline

for doing so, which raises obvious timeliness implications. See generally 5 C.F.R.

§ 1201.114(e) (providing that a petition for review must generally be filed within

35 days after the initial decision is issued). However, we do not reach the issue of

timeliness because the appellant’s petition for judicial review divested the Board of

jurisdiction over any petition for review that he might subsequently file with the

Board. See Lynch v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation , 60 M.S.P.R. 447,

448-49 (1994); Weinberger v. Department of the Army, 55 M.S.P.R. 270, 272-73

(1992). When the appellant petitioned for review with the Federal Circuit, he

“surrender[ed] his right to appeal to the Board” and his efforts “to show good cause

for ‘untimeliness’ were irrelevant.” Williams v. U.S. Postal Service, 967 F.2d 577,

578 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (holding that the appellant surrendered his right to appeal to

the Board when he petitioned another agency, the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission, for review); see Del Marcelle v. Department of the Treasury , 59

M.S.P.R. 251, 253 (1993) (applying the holding in Williams and finding that the

appellant’s filing with the Federal Circuit divested the Board of jurisdiction).

Accordingly, we must dismiss the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction. 2 See

Del Marcelle, 59 M.S.P.R. at 253.

This is the final order of the Merit Systems Protection Board regarding the

Board’s jurisdiction to consider the petition for review. The initial decision will

remain the final decision of the Board with regard to the merits of the appeal.

5 C.F.R. § 1201.113.

Because the Board lacks jurisdiction over the appellant’s petition for review, we do not

reach whether the administrative judge erred by failing to provide the appellant with

complete hearing transcripts pursuant to 5 C.F.R. § 1207.120, and we take no further

action on his request.

NOTICE OF APPEAL RIGHTS 3

You may obtain review of this final decision. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(a)(1). By

statute, the nature of your claims determines the time limit for seeking such review

and the appropriate forum with which to file. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b). Although we

offer the following summary of available appeal rights, the Merit Systems

Protection Board does not provide legal advice on which option is most appropriate

for your situation and the rights described below do not represent a statement of

how courts will rule regarding which cases fall within their jurisdiction. If you

wish to seek review of this final decision, you should immediately review the law

applicable to your claims and carefully follow all filing time limits and

requirements. Failure to file within the applicable time limit may result in the

dismissal of your case by your chosen forum.

Please read carefully each of the three main possible choices of review below

to decide which one applies to your particular case. If you have questions about

whether a particular forum is the appropriate one to review your case, you should

contact that forum for more information.

(1) Judicial review in general . As a general rule, an appellant seeking

judicial review of a final Board order must file a petition for review with the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which must be received by the court

within 60 calendar days of the date of issuance of this decision. 5 U.S.C.

§ 7703(b)(1)(A).

If you submit a petition for review to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

Federal Circuit, you must submit your petition to the court at the following address:

U.S. Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

717 Madison Place, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20439

Since the issuance of the initial decision in this matter, the Board may have updated the

notice of review rights included in final decisions. As indicated in the notice, the Board

cannot advise which option is most appropriate in any matter.

Additional information about the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal

Circuit is available at the court’s website, www.cafc.uscourts.gov. Of particular

relevance is the court’s “Guide for Pro Se Petitioners and Appellants,” which is

contained within the court’s Rules of Practice, and Forms 5, 6, 10, and 11.

If you are interested in securing pro bono representation for an appeal to the

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, you may visit our website at

http://www.mspb.gov/probono for information regarding pro bono representation

for Merit Systems Protection Board appellants before the Federal Circuit. The

Board neither endorses the services provided by any attorney nor warrants that any

attorney will accept representation in a given case.

(2) Judicial or EEOC review of cases involving a claim of discrimination.

This option applies to you only if you have claimed that you were affected by an

action that is appealable to the Board and that such action was based, in whole or in

part, on unlawful discrimination. If so, you may obtain judicial review of this

decision—including a disposition of your discrimination claims —by filing a civil

action with an appropriate U.S. district court (not the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

Federal Circuit), within 30 calendar days after you receive this decision. 5 U.S.C.

§ 7703(b)(2); see Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 582 U.S. 420 (2017). If

you have a representative in this case, and your representative receives this

decision before you do, then you must file with the district court no later than

30 calendar days after your representative receives this decision. If the action

involves a claim of discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national

origin, or a disabling condition, you may be entitled to representation by a

court-appointed lawyer and to waiver of any requirement of prepayment of fees,

costs, or other security. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f) and 29 U.S.C. § 794a.

Contact information for U.S. district courts can be found at their respective

websites, which can be accessed through the link below:

http://www.uscourts.gov/Court_Locator/CourtWebsites.aspx .

Alternatively, you may request review by the Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission (EEOC) of your discrimination claims only, excluding all

other issues . 5 U.S.C. § 7702(b)(1). You must file any such request with the

EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations within 30 calendar days after you receive

this decision. 5 U.S.C. § 7702(b)(1). If you have a representative in this case, and

your representative receives this decision before you do, then you must file with the

EEOC no later than 30 calendar days after your representative receives this

decision.

If you submit a request for review to the EEOC by regular U.S. mail, the

address of the EEOC is:

Office of Federal Operations

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, D.C. 20013

If you submit a request for review to the EEOC via commercial delivery or

by a method requiring a signature, it must be addressed to:

Office of Federal Operations

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

131 M Street, N.E.

Suite 5SW12G

Washington, D.C. 20507

(3) Judicial review pursuant to the Whistleblower Protection

Enhancement Act of 2012 . This option applies to you only if you have raised

claims of reprisal for whistleblowing disclosures under 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(8) or

other protected activities listed in 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(9)(A)(i), (B), (C), or (D). If

so, and your judicial petition for review “raises no challenge to the Board’s

disposition of allegations of a prohibited personnel practice described in

section 2302(b) other than practices described in section 2302(b)(8), or

2302(b)(9)(A)(i), (B), (C), or (D),” then you may file a petition for judicial review

either with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or any court of appeals

of competent jurisdiction. 4 The court of appeals must receive your petition for

review within 60 days of the date of issuance of this decision. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)

(1)(B).

If you submit a petition for judicial review to the U.S. Court of Appeals for

the Federal Circuit, you must submit your petition to the court at the following

address: