Opinion

Kevin Malone v. Department of Labor

Court
Merit Systems Protection Board
Filed
Mar 4, 2016
Status
Unpublished
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

KEVIN MALONE, DOCKET NUMBER

Appellant, DC-0432-14-0501-I-1

v.

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, DATE: March 4, 2016

Agency.

THIS FINAL ORDER IS NONPRECEDENTIAL *

Cheri L. Cannon, Esquire, Washington, D.C., for the appellant.

Katherine Brewer, Washington, D.C., for the agency.

BEFORE

Susan Tsui Grundmann, Chairman

Mark A. Robbins, Member

FINAL ORDER

¶1 The agency has petitioned for review of the March 11, 2015 initial decision

in this appeal. Initial Appeal File (IAF), Tab 43, Initial Decision; Petition for

Review (PFR) File, Tabs 1, 4-5. For the reasons set forth below, we DISMISS

the petition for review as settled.

*

A nonprecedential order is one that the Board has determined does not add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 Parties may cite nonprecedential orders,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).

2

¶2 After the filing of the petition for review, the parties submitted a document

entitled “SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND GENERAL RELEASE” signed

and dated by the parties on September 30, 2015. PFR File, Tab 16. The

document provides, among other things, for the dismissal of the petition for

review. Id., ¶ 3.

¶3 Before dismissing a matter as settled, the Board must decide whether the

parties have entered into a settlement agreement, understand its terms, and intend

to have the agreement entered into the record for enforcement by the Board. See

Mahoney v. U.S. Postal Service, 37 M.S.P.R. 146, 149 (1988). We find here that

the parties have, in fact, entered into a settlement agreement, that they

understand the terms, and that they want the Board to enforce those terms. See

PFR File, Tab 16, ¶ 4.

¶4 In addition, before accepting a settlement agreement into the record for

enforcement purposes, the Board must determine whether the agreement is lawful

on its face, whether the parties freely entered into it, and whether the subject

matter of this appeal is within the Board’s jurisdiction; that is, whether a law,

rule, or regulation grants the Board the authority to decide such a matter. See

Stewart v. U.S. Postal Service, 73 M.S.P.R. 104, 107 (1997). We find here that

the agreement is lawful on its face, that the parties freely entered into it, and that

the subject matter of this appeal—the performance-based removal of a full-time

Federal employee—is within the Board’s jurisdiction under 5 U.S.C. § 4303(c).

IAF, Tab 6. Accordingly, we find that dismissal of the petition for review “with

prejudice to refiling” (i.e., the parties normally may not refile this appeal) is

appropriate under these circumstances, and we accept the settlement agreement

into the record for enforcement purposes.

¶5 This is the final order of the Merit Systems Protection Board in this appeal.

Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulation, section 1201.113 (5 C.F.R.

§ 1201.113).

3

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES OF THEIR

ENFORCEMENT RIGHTS

If the agency or the appellant has not fully carried out the terms of the

agreement, either party may ask the Board to enforce the settlement agreement by

promptly filing a petition for enforcement with the office that issued the initial

decision on this appeal. The petition should contain specific reasons why the

petitioning party believes that the terms of the settlement agreement have not

been fully carried out, and should include the dates and results of any

communications between the parties. 5 C.F.R. § 1201.182(a).

NOTICE TO THE APPELLANT REGARDING

YOUR FURTHER REVIEW RIGHTS

You have the right to request further review of this final decision.

Discrimination Claims: Administrative Review

You may request review of this final decision on your discrimination

claims by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). See title 5

of the U.S. Code, section 7702(b)(1) (5 U.S.C. § 7702(b)(1)). If you submit your

request 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 your request 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, NE

Suite 5SW12G

Washington, D.C. 20507

You should send your request to EEOC no later than 30 calendar days after

your receipt of this order. If you have a representative in this case, and your

representative receives this order before you do, then you must file with EEOC no

4

later than 30 calendar days after receipt by your representative. If you choose to

file, be very careful to file on time.

Discrimination and Other Claims: Judicial Action

If you do not request EEOC to review this final decision on your

discrimination claims, you may file a civil action against the agency on both your

discrimination claims and your other claims in an appropriate U.S. district court.

See 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2). You must file your civil action with the district court

no later than 30 calendar days after your receipt of this order. If you have a

representative in this case, and your representative receives this order before you

do, then you must file with the district court no later than 30 calendar days after

receipt by your representative. If you choose to file, be very careful to file on

time. 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.

FOR THE BOARD: ______________________________

William D. Spencer

Clerk of the Board

Washington, D.C.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.