Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Cordero v. Mineta

2 ” Supreme Court, U.S.

fl} FILED

001931 may 3 1 200%

OSS OF 148 CLERK

No.:

In THE

Supreme Court of the United States

—_——-- -- -—_——

Angel F. Cordero,

Petitioner,

V.

Rodney E. Slater,

‘Respondent,

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Angel F. Cordero

(Petitioner Pro se)

800 Edmonton Circle

Goose Creek, SC 29445

(843) 553-3562

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

Mr. Angel F. Cordero, (Petitioner) served proudly the

Federal Government of the United States of America for 28

years and 7 months, and was forced into retirement on Jan

1997, due to the fact that his career progression has to come

to a complete stop since 1990. After thorough investigation,

found out, his career progression has stopped due to a

conspiracy and other acts of hate and crimes committed by

the individuals mentioned in this petition. Although he

kept the Civil Rights Offices & Officers in the Atlanta

Regional offices well informed of these crimes and

Violations to his Civil Rights and Instituted Laws, nothing

was ever done to stop these abuses of power, nor a formal

investigation carried out, nor sanctions applied to theses

perpetrators. He seek help and guidance for seven years,

but nothing was ever done to resolve the issues presented;

nor corrective action taken. Now may I ask.

1. Did a violation to Title VII of the Civil

Rights ACT of 1964 existed and taken in consideration.

Together with the Issues of Law and violations to the

Constitution of the United States of America Fourteenth

Amendment’s Due Process Clause. that insures,

establish Justice and domestic Tranquillity, as well as

secure Blessing of Liberty and the Pursuit of

Happiness.

2. Whether the Court of Appeals erred by not

taking in consideration and or overlooking these Facts

of Law, or Crimes committed against the Petitioner:

Such as, Conspiracy, Forgery, Malicious Mischief, and

Perjury

Will the Petitioner be granted a Jury trial, and or the

Honorable Supreme Court of the UNITED STATES of

AMERICA will make a final decision reference these

Violations to my Civil Right and these Issues of Law.

ii

PARTIES

The petitioner in this case is Angel F. Cordero, a

Pro se litigant.

The respondents in this case is the Honorable

Secretary Of Transportation; Rodney E. Slater

ee Py ae

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ............cccccsscosscesscsceees i

SIN hi dedubnstnsnehbehbendpensesossesenanesoesssaensseroossene ii

EET GT GPRPUEETEBEEED ccccvscccncscceccessonccceascccncnes iii

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORAR ........... l

TET Siduntawnaghesceetscncschopacessscccnsesonns l

TE icdiieiutesitsaddlinagnecinenésesebestnsasennsccsente 2

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS INVOLVED ..... 2

STATEMENT OF THE CASE. .........cccccoscccssscccscees 3

Se MIEN <incicusnnccevessesccersecccsevessonetens 3

is POCERN MOCO cncccccccccncccccsseccacese 5

ie IE III cis isnntnepaatesnecnncnasecceneuece 8

REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT ............. 14

THE COURT SHOULD GRANT REVIEW TO

CLARIFY THE ABOVE STATEMENTS AND GIVE

A FINAL DECISION AS TO THE LEGALITY OF

THE ISSUES OF LAW, AND VIOLATIONS

DEED secchidbshdcdddantvscontadkesahschecsecsncncsensoss 14

STANDARD FOR DECISION ..............csccceeeeeeees 15

TINE wqhehpecintduecdnbuiechsscestescbseqncensenctscsans 15

SEL dntinigsnenbondhcageneyeesadeninescedasaccesicepsbecsse 17

In THE

Supreme Court of the United States

No. 00-

Angel F. Cordero,

Petitioner,

Vv.

Rodney E. Slater,

Respondent,

On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Petitioner Angel F. Cordero respectfully requests that a

writ of certiorari issue to review the judgment of the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Cordero v.

Slater, No. 00-2100

OPINIONS BELOW

The opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the

Fourth Circuit is unpublished and is reprinted in the

appendix to this petition at App. la. The order of the US.

District Court for the District of South Carolina, Filed Jul

27, 2000 adopting the Summary Judgment submitted by

the Defendant's, at App. 2a and the answer to my Motion

Sa aiid Ah

2

for Reconsideration opposing the Honorable Court's

decision Filed Aug 15, 2000. At App. 3a,

JURISDICTION

The final opinion of the Fourth Circuit was issued and or

Filed February 21, 2001 and received by my in the early

part of March 2001 I have requested from the U.S. Court

of Appeals or proper procedures and guidelines and

consider my petition timely filed. Based on these facts the

jurisdiction of this Supreme Court of the United States of

America is invoked.

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS INVOLVED

The Basic Rights of every individual, as stipulated in the

preamble to the Constitution of the UNITED STATES. We,

the people of the United States, in Order to form a more

perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility,

and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our

Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the

United States of America. Liberty and Freedom from

Conspiracies, Discrimination, Hate and Violations to

Instituted Rights and Issues of Law.

3

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

A. Introduction

I have been pursuing these cases for the past three years

after investigating and analyzing the information offered

to me through the legal process, and I have found that the

Federal Aviation Administration, as well as other

Departments of the U.S. Government, assigned to

investigate these cases have prevented the Honorable

Courts of Justice from assessing all the facts that when

really presented and analyzed will undoubtedly tell a story

of “the truth-seeking function that will eventually lead to a

jury trial.” The Act of Hate and Crimes committed by

these individual were never brought to light not

mentioned or disputed by the Defendant's. Conspiracy

requires an intentional mischief and a well pre-planned

action. As done in the cases presented and substantiated

by Perjury and or False testimony on Sworn statements,

given by these government officials and presented will my

cases since the beginning. With Ill-intent to deceive and

intentionally slander the Petitioner's reputation, and

eventually and forcefully pressure him into retirement.

These AFFIDAVITS are reprinted as Exhibits.,

C: Affidavit of Mr. William P. Dorminy, Air Traffic

Manager Gainesville, Flight Service Sta. Gainesville

Florida DOT/FAA dated 29 March 1994

E. Affidavit of Mr. William Rodenfels, Aijir Traffic

Supervisor, Gainesville Flight Services, Gainesville

Florida DOT / FAA dated 19 October 1998

F. Affidavit of Mr. William P. Dorminy (retired) Air

Traffic Manager, Gainesville, AFSS, Gainesville, Florida

DOT, FAA dated 19 October 1998

G. Affidavit of Mr. Francisco Estrada Cotto, Air Traffic

Manager, San Juan Automated Flight Services, San

Juan, Puerto Rico. Dated 25 Jan 1996

4

I believe these AFFIDAVITS by themselves constitute

enough evidence to prosecute these individuals as guilty

parties in a Conspiracy and grant the Petitioner an

opportunity of a Jury trial, as requested since the

beginning.

5

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Petitioner, Angel F. Cordero, was employed by

the Federal Aviation Administration for approximately 25

years, Prior to been hired by the Agency, Mr.Cordero had

served proudly with the United States Air Force and

Honorably Discharged, Worked four years of active duty

as a Communications Center Specialist. After been

Honorably Discharged, worked for the Airlines Industry

in Puerto Rico for ten years, as an Air-to-ground

Radio/Teletype operator as well as an Operations

Agent, Public Relations officer and later became vice-

president of the Airline Employees Association (ALEA)

labor organization. (Union).

Which means that before I was hired by the DOT/

FAA I had already been exposed to Communications

and the Air Traffic System for at least fourteen (14)

years. I carried this experience with me tothe DOT/

FAA, when hired on May 30, 1972 as an Air Traffic

Controller, Developmental/Specialist.. After proving

myself in the Live-Radar environment and based on my

exposure and _ previous experience with the Airline

Industry, besides Public Relations with the community

and General Flying Public, in the Puerto Rico area, I

decided to “Change Options” and bea better asset to

the DOT/FAA by joining the ranks of the San Juan

International Flight Services.

Proof of this, is the numerous Awards and

Commendations received with respect to my dealings

with the Flying Community.. As well as with my peers.

Among the Awards received, there is one that includes the

Design and Plans for the NEW-ERA of Automation of

the Flight Service stations, within the Department of

Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration. I also

6

served as Operations Officer and Coordinator of various

Aviation related events in the Puerto Rico / Virgin

Islands area.

Based on these qualifications by August of 1979, was

promoted from within the ranks to Area Supervisor.

Where I continued my career progression by been part

of the, Supervisory Committee, the Facility of Air Traffic

Technical Advisory Committee, the Pilot Education

Program team. Also Budget Officer, Security Officer or

Custodian of Classified Documents, and detailed as

Deputy Chief. Demonstrating being a true asset to the

DOT/FAA.

Was transferred to the Charleston Flight Service

station, Charleston, South Carolina on March of 1983

after been selected by this facility as an Area

Supervisor. Position that I held until Charleston FSS

was closed down on January 1990; due to the

devastation created by hurricane Hugo. Giving me a

combined time of twelve (12) years as a Supervisor of

Air Traffic services, and also the opportunity to

demonstrate my Managerial abilities, as well as Public

Relations officer and journeyman.

From 1975 until 1990, I had obtained achieved,

among other recognition’s: Eleven (11) Official letters of

Commendation/Government Awards. Four Special

Achievement Government awards. and _ seven (7)

PERFORMANCE AWARDS and Government AWARDS

for EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMANCE., cuting the years

1987, 1988., 1989., and 1990. Exhibit A

On January 1990, I was transferred to the Anderson

Automated Flight Service Station as a journeyman, and

from that moment on, my successful career with the

FAA, came toan abrupt stop. Despite all efforts to

7

prove myself. I was never given the opportunity to

apply nor demonstrate my abilities and or make use of

my skills and previously acquired experiences and

knowledge. Nor continue being and asset to the D.O.

T./F.A.A. However, while in Anderson AFSS I was

able to participate and excel in the Supervisory

Identification Development Program. Also succeeded in

been Certified by the National Weather Service as a

Meteorology Ground Weather Observer, and checked

out in model-1 Automation equipment, as well as the

ICSS, operations.

From Anderson, AFSS., I was reassigned and

transferred tu the Jacksonville Flight Service station and

here is where I found some answers to the questions

about why my successful career with the Federal

Aviation Administration, has been destroyed, and by

whom (s), After a ten years pursuit for the truth.

EXHIBIT B; Summary of E.E.O. Counselor, Mr.Curtis

Milton, Jacksonville, Fla, dated 3-29-93, is an "example" of

the Intimidating, Biased, Discriminatory , and

incriminatory attitude of Mr. William P. Dorminy, when to

this investigator he responded" would never assigned him

to that position UNLESS ORDERED TO DO SO BY A

SUPERIOR". Implying in this case and or making reference

to:

A. The Honorable Secretary of Transportation and or

B. The Honorable President of the United States of America.

This remark by itself is extremely offensive, demoralizing,

and discriminatory in nature. Specially coming form the

Manager of the North Florida D.O.T. / F .A.A. Has indeed a

heavy weight and adverse connotations and consequences.

Highly prejudicial specially to the future of my fruitful

career and considered a direct violation to my Civil Rights

as well as to the Rights of every individual as protected by

the Constitution of the United States of America. And

8

Contradict his justification for selection as demonstrated on

Exhibit B2.

ISSUES OF FACTS

All these FACTS will now lead to the “Real Issues

of Law” as expressed on my Civil Actions, of Violations

to my Civil and Constitutional Rights, as well as

Prohibited Statues of the Merit Systems Protection

Board, and the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission. And as_ expressed these proofs of

wrongdoing when connected, will establish a logical

inference or conclusion that such a fact does exists.

My two main accusers were/are Mr. Victor Byrd

and Mr. William Rodenfels. Conspiracy and_ the

unlawful Act., committed by Mr. William Dorminy,

when based on misinformation obtained by Mr. Victor

Byrd and Mr. Mike Powerly, of the southern region Air

Traffic Division, and with willful and _ intentionally

Malicious mischief, Defamed my name and Reputation

with the purpose of injuring, the until then and as

expressed above my successful career progression with

the D.O.T. / F.A.A.

Enclosed find “Sworn Affidavit of

Mr. William P. Dorminy Manager of the Gainesville

Automated Flight Service Station on 29 March

1994. Exhibit C.

9

This whole document is a series of LIES., and

perjury committed by this High Ranking Official of the

Federal Aviation Administration and based only on the

“RECOMMENDATIONS’ given by Mr. Victor Byrd with

the sole purpose of slandering my reputation.

Another SWORN AFFIDAVIT, Declaration of William

P. Dorminy, dated 19 October 1998 this time using

Mr. William Rodenfels as a supportive figure. Again,

this document is nothing more than another Series of

Lies, and Derogatory Statements., used to completely

destroy my career and my livelihood. Sworn

Affidavit signed under penalty of ‘perjury’ dated 19%

October 1998

I will make at this time, a brief mention to Par.4, of

Mr. William Rodenfels declaration,

EXHIBIT D: Summary of investigation performed by Mr.

Carlos V. Otero, dated June 1994, was part of evidence

submitted with my cases., on which the Allegations of

Abuse of Sick Leave after its investigation, proved, beyond

a shadow of doubt, another Conspiracy. A Pre-planned,

Pre-Pre-meditated act of Prohibited Personnel Practice,

master minded at the Gainesville, AFSS, Gainesville,

Florida by among others, Mr. William P. Dorminy, a High

Ranking official of the Executive Branch of the D.O.T. F. A.

A. As far as August 1992, seven months prior to the non-

selection. Used an misfortunate job related accident to

defame, and discredit me as a potential candidate for any

and all possible promotions within the Southern Region,

and using Mr. Emeris Smitherman the Air Traffic Manager

of the Jacksonville Flight Service Station, and Mr. William

Rodenfels, supervisor of this same facility, as conspirators

in this event, to defeat, defame, discredit, and dishonor me

as an individual.

When I was falsely accused of abusing sick leave. Instead

of been authorized and obtain the benefits associated with

j

‘

10

traumatic leave. | used my accrued sick leave to meet the

demands of the medical appointments related to the

injuries suffered to my back, on a job related accident,

while helping a co-worker cope with an emergency. It was

to these individual advantages this event and misfortune.

As it gave them the opportunity to fabricate charges and

built a case against me. The first in my 20 years of FAA

career. The matter was such, that even the paperwork (CA-

1) and other forms and statements submitted by me on June

6, 1992, including the Notice of Job Related traumatic injury

were held back, nor submitted to the office of Worker's

Compensation programs, as late as July 14, 1992. Five

weeks later. So I never obtained the benefits (if any)

associated with the injuries suffered to my back, including

the payment for the use of my sick leave accrued, nor

traumatic leave. All the time used to recuperate form the

pain and suffering to my injured back, including

medication and doctors appointment requested, were

charged to my sick leave. And later used to unjustly and

unfairly, charging me with Abuse of Sick Leave. And use

this event as a contra productive recommendation

whenever I were to apply for, any future vacancy and or

possible selection. Finally, and after Mr. Carlos v. Otero

investigation, Mr. Emeris Smitherman and Mr. William

Rodenfels admitted to the "truth and facts" of the real

originator of the Conspiracy Exhibit D.

“Abusing of Sick Leave” As well as Par. #7 of Mr.

William P. Dorminy on which he uses this sad event as an

excuse to continue his Defamation of my Character

and Reputation and prevent form that moment on, any

further opportunities of Career Progression. All of these

going against Rules and Regulations governing the

Merit Systems Protection Board, The Constitution of the

United States of America and my Civil Rights

Another example of the extremes, to which persons like

11

Mr. William P. Dorminy, Mr. Emeris Smitherman, and

Mr. William Rodenfels were willing to go in order to

“Destroy my livelihood” and career progression, as well

as my family life and personal reputation. A clear

visible and undisputed case of conspiracy, defamation of

character, deceit, perjury, and slander.

I believe these cases as presented to both, The District

Court of the United States for the District of South Carolina,

Charleston Division and the United States Court of

Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, proven beyond any

reasonable doubt, a conspiracy. And that these accusations

were / are false and without fundaments and this case

warrants either a final decision form the Honorable

Supreme Court, or a judgment for a continuation as a jury

trial. As all accusation were premeditated and or another

way of Mr. William Rodenfels and Mr. Victor Byrd,

retaliatory measures, to finally and completely destroy

me, aSa person and individual.

It is hard to believe the inconsistencies found on

these cases. And how so many _ persons § and

Government Agencies were manipulated to participate,

directly or indirectly into it. Including but not limited,

to go to the extreme, or as faras, to =falsify= official

documents in order to incriminate me.

The whole case was nothing more than an Act of

Conspiracy and Deceit. And it should have been corrected

immediately. Starting by actions taken by Mr. Frank

Estrada Cotto (based on his OWN testimony,) were

not his., as HE was not given any participation on this

Conspiracy., other than be used as a “signature

figure”. .His AFFIDAVIT dated 25th January

1996, Gives “Testimony” to this as in enclosed as,

Exhibit G.

On s*Par. 3., Mr. Cotto is very specific, when

he says: “I signed it and gave it to Cordero.

12

When I got Cordero’s response, I sent it to BYRD”

etc., etc, Par. #4 is even more explicit, when Mr.

Cotto’s says., “I do not remember whether I wrote

the letter at their (???) instruction or they sent one for

my signature. I did not do an independent investigation

before issuing this letter either. I did not have access to

the underlying facts and circumstances. And more perjury

committed when on his letter dated Feb 10, 1995, He

states “I have given full consideration to the

information you presented in your written reply dated

December 14, 1994. etc.,etc. Exhibit G2. Never the

less Mr. Frank Estrada-Cotto, on his Sworn Affidavit dated

Jan. 25, 1996, admits to Ms. Wilma Rosenberg. On Par 6.

And making reference to documents presented to him by

the investigation, “This is the first time I have seen this

document”. We are talking about accusations made 1%

years earlier. Decision made forcefully on Oct 25, 1994 as

ordered by his superior, and the truth of the facts, on this

issue of Law, or Conspiracy came to light on Jan 25, 1996.

He or whoever was directing the CONSPIRACY and

Defamation., at the Region failed to notice that together

with answers to Specification 7 & 8, I have pointed out

Inconsistencies to their allegations. Including a “parallel

timetable” submitted, in order to demonstrate, swift

retaliation, and part of these inconsistencies. or

impossibilities.

The Honorable Secretary, also mention the National

Association of Air Traffic Specialists(NAATS

UNION ). As Exhibits H and I, Ihave reprinted letter

of the San Juan International Flight Service Station

( NAATS) facility representative., Ms. Grizzelle M.

Canter, dated 8/31/94 4:pm.

After making an independent investigation on behalf of

NAATS labor organization. The Facility Rep. is very

13

specific when she writes. “Mr. Jones said he was not

able to help me because it had been a while, since they

(Making reference to Continental Airlines ) kept records

and therefore they had no records that would say if

any FAA person were on any specific flight of any

specific day. Also a Record of Telephone Call is

presented as evidence., dated 12/09/94, 12:50 PM

Page 1: Tom Jones reply to her question, “I don’t have

this information because (WE) don’t retain these

manifests. All I sent FAA was nothing more than a

telex provided by my people. It was not a manifest,

nor a permanent record. 1 know I gave them about

five dates, but I’m not sure.” Etc., etc., On Page3 Ms.

Canter advises Mr. Ton Jones, that she was asked to

attend the meeting as a witness. Also when requested

copy of the TELEX sent to Victor Byrd., Mr. Jones

replied I don’t even know where it is...1 provided

nothing more than just a teletype message. The complete

4 page document is very “relevant” to these charges of

Conspiracy. So the NAATS Union was well aware of

what was going on. And as well as other Government

Agencies, did nothing to protect my rights, or defend

me from these false accusations. This is the

National Association of Air Traffic Specialists +

Union + representation that I declined officially.

Another question that still puzzles everyone, and

I will mention it briefly, is the more than 33 cases

of Discrimination and Abuse of Power

committed against me by these individuals that !

submitted to the Civil Rights Offices in Atlanta,

Georgia, all of them properly submitted through

the E.E.O complaint process, were completely

“ignored” nor mentioned whatsoever by the

Respondents.

14

~ 1. What was the Civil Rights Office in Atlanta, Agency

supposed to “Protect” your Rights, and prevent these

abuses for occurring. Doing or did to that respect.?

2. What action(s) was ever taken -if any- by the Civil

Rights Officer's to “correct” these injustices,

unfairness, deficiencies, and bring Justice to any

of my cases.

I kept the Civil Rights Offices in Atlanta, well informed

of every single incident of Discrimination, that I was a

victim. Including this one. I cried out for HELP_ for

7 years, and nothing was ever done to correct these Acts of

Hate and crimes committed against me. This Government

Agency is there to “Protect any individual” whose Civil

and or Constitutional Rights seems to have been

violated. But it did not happened in my cases.

These are part of the “Facts of Law” that have not

been addressed nor disputed by the Hon. Secretary. I have

enough evidence to Substantiate all my cases. Nor

mentioned by the District Court of the United States for the

District of South Carolina, Charleston Division, nor the

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.

REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT

THE COURT SHOULD GRANT REVIEW TO

CLARIFY THE ABOVE STATEMENTS. AND GIVE A

FINAL DECISION AS TO THE LEGALITY OF THE

ISSUES OF LAW, AND VIOLATIONS PRESENTED.

15

STANDARD FOR DECISION

I believe the “EVIDENCE’ presented with my

request for Writ of Certiorari shows that there is a

genuine ISSUE of LAW to move this Case to a JURY-

Trial and allowed them to return a_ verdict..

DISCUSSION

There is sufficient evidence presented with this case to

substantiate Mr. Cordero’s claims of Discrimination and

Violations to his Civil and Constitutional Rights. It is

evident by the Exhibits presented, that Mr. Cordero

did everything in his power to bring, his complaints of

Abuse of Power, and Discrimination to different stages,

and agencies of the Federal Government. His, Civil

Rights were violated not only once, but on multiple

occasions, as well as his Constitutional Rights as He

“cried for help”. All these unlawful acts of employment

discrimination well evidenced, and were brought to the

awareness of the Federal Aviation Administration, during

seven years. Up to, and including: the Civil Rights

Offices in Atlanta. The Office of Special Counsel in

Washington, and the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission. All these events were presented as soon

as my career progression “STOPPED” of alla sudden,

after my arrivalto Jacksonville, Flight Service Station,

Jacksonville , Florida., where I was forced to stay and

undergo a SERIES of injustices and unfairness, While

the Agency failed to take proper and corrective action.

Nor permitted to regain control of my career, nor settle

down with my Family, in any of the selected locations.

During the time I spent in Jacksonville, the Civil Rights

Office was well aware of these discriminatory

practices, and that I was “wasting my time”. Again

the Agency failed to take any action against the

16

perpetrator (s). And continued to expose me to the

hostile environment created by my superior(s) and

reflected, later on some of my peer’s behavior’s. Not

counting that by 1992 or earlier, already Mr. Victor

Byrd with his derogatory (s) statements and

recommendations as presented in earlier exhibits., has

already “KILLED” any possibilities that my career

progression will ever be the same. His quest for

Defamation, Slander, and Discrimination, continued

until the date of my retirement..

The Agency opted for ignoring these issues. These

hostile pursuit continued until the last minutes of

Jacksonville FSS , in Florida, and later as demonstrated by

my exhibits; well into the San Juan IAFSS environment.

It is amazing and or incredible, without logic, that

these Agencies have not noticed this pattern of terror.

All along, coming/initiated by people highly educated

and probably well trained on Learn Behavior. That these

persons failed to come to an honest conclusion of the

Real Issues, as in this case. Disregarding the emotional

and psychological impact on me and my Family. All

based on the DOT FAA failure to stop these Abuses

of Power and Acts of Discrimination. I believe to bea

prudent, judicious, and cautious person, respectful of

the law. Although victim of these prejudices, and using

good - judgment, I did not exposed my Family to the

Living HELL, I was exposed to, from 1990 through

1996. Public Humiliation., Embarrassment in front of my

coworkers., and others ACTS of show of Force, Hate, and

Discrimination that I suffered. Never investigated nor

brought about to the Department of Justice.

I believe this whole case was not - only another

example of a sour “CONSPIRACY”, but totally

unprofessional. The many inconsistencies and

distortions to the truth, denotes this. It is too late to

17

stop the damage done by these irresponsible ACTS., to

me and my whole family. The damage done tome, as a

person, and as an individual, not counting my career

destruction, as well as to my Family, !< far, too much, or

too great to explainit, at this point in time.

HOWEVER

I only hope that my perseverance and dedication to

this case over the past five and half years will shed some

light to many injustices and discriminatory practices that

exist in the work place today. As well as their effects on

individual lives and families. Unless accurate records

and Evidences of these occurrences, are kept, and were

presented, as I have done with this document. these

injustices will be rated as “Unbelievable, Exaggerated,

and will probably be ignored and allowed to continue

or pass as an everyday happenings to most observers.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the petition for writ of

certiorari should be granted.

Respectfully submitted,

Angel F. Cordero

800 Edmonton Circle

Goose Creek, S.C. 29445

(843) 553 3562

ee

18

EXHIBIT A

SUMMARY OF Mr. Curtis Milton E.E.O.

Counselor , Jacksonville, Florida, dated 3-29-93.

On 3-29-93 I interviewed Mr. Bill Dorminy at which time

I informed him that I was fact finding on an alleged

discrimination by Mr. Angel Cordero. I informed him that

Mr. Cordero’s alleged discrimination was based on

National Origin (Puerto Rican). I asked Mr. Dorminy what

standards or qualifications did he used in the selection

process of the applicants? Mr. Dorminy’s response was,

“they need only to be a Full Performance Controller

(FPL)”> I then questioned Mr. Dorminy on his reason for

not selecting Mr. Cordero, since he appeared to be one of

the most qualified applicants based on experience and

because of his previous certification on the computer

system that the candidate would be required to operate.

Mr. Dorminy’s response was, “Mr. Cordero has for the last

five or six years has a performance problem”, counseled

for use of sick leave in conjunction with RDOs, and he

poor english made if difficult to understand him. I then

questioned Mr. Dorminy on the extent of Mr. Cordero’s

contact with others, would it be within the FAA or would

it be outside the facility and with the general public. Mr.

Dorminy’s responded, with other FAA facilities only. I

then asked why then could Mr. Cordero have maintained a

twenty year employment with the FAA, part of which was

as a supervisor at another facility, and his speech was not

a problem before. Mr. Dorminy then indicated that Mr.

Cordero had, had a speech problem at Anderson FSS

which was the reason for his not checking out there. I

asked if he would reconsider him for the FSDPS position at

JAX ARTC Center. He responded he would never

assigned him to that position unless ordered to do so bya

superior.

“s/ ””

19

EXHIBIT A2

U.S. Department.

of Transportation

AUTOMATED FLIGHT SERVICE STAT

Federal Aviation 4301 Northeast Waldo Road

Administration Gainesville, Florida 32609

Date: 2/23/93

Subject: Information: Justification for Selection

Of ATCS, AUS, FSDPS, Jacksonville, FL

From: Air Traffic Manager Reply to

Gainesville, FL, AFSS Attn of:

To: Manager, Human Resources

After careful consideration of personal qualifications and

performance requirements for the vacant Automation

Specialist positions at the new Flight Service Data

Processing system (FSDPS) at Jacksonville ARTCC, I have

selected the following personnel.

Ms. Jacquline J. Lenard, ATCS Jacksonville, FL, FSS

Mr. Burl W. Jones, ATCS Jacksonville, FL, FSS

Mr. Harold C. Rogers, ATCS Jacksonville, FL, FSS

Mr. Eric J. Strand, ATCS Gainesville, FL, FSS .

Our outreach efforts identified two female minorities and

three male minorities. Of these, one female minority, Ms.

Lenard, and two of the male minorities, Mr. Rogers and

Mr. Strand were selected for the position. One male

minority, Mr. Cordero, and one female minority, Ms. Giles

lacked the automation experience for such a technical

position.

“S / “

William P. Dorroiny

20

EXHIBIT B

PARTIAL LIST OF AWARD OBTAINED AND DATES

All of these obtained within they the Federal Aviation

Administration and within the dates indicated by the E.E.

O. Counselor’s report SUMMARY of INQUIRY to Mr.

William Dorminy:

Official Letter of Commendation Government Award

02/75

Official Letter of Commendation Government Award

12/75

Special Achievement Award ASJU-1 03/76

Special Achievement Award ASJU-1 06/76

Official Letter of Commendation Government Award

09/77

Special Achievement Award = ASJU-1 02/78

Official Letter of Commendation Government Award

12/81

Official Letter of Commendation Government Award

11/82

Special Achievement Award SJU-IFSS 02/83

Performance Award EXCEP-GPAD ATM CHS-FSS 07/87

Performance Award EXCEP GPAD ATM CHS-FSS 07/88

Performance Award - NON-PMRS Employee Government

Award 08/88

Performance Award NON-PRMS Employee Government

Award 07/89

Performance Award-EXCEP GPAD ATM CHS-FSS

07/89

Official Letter of Commendation Government Award

11/89

Official Letter of Commendation Government Award

05/90

Performance Award EXCP GPAD ATM AND-AFSS

07/90

21

EXHIBIT B-2

Reprint of letter dated 2123193 Justification for Selection of

ATCS, AUS, FSDPS, Jacksonville, FL

U.S. Department

of Transportation AUTOMATED FLIGHT

SERVICE STATION

Federal Aviation 4301 Northeast Waldo Road

Administration Gainesville, Florida 32609

Subject: Information: Justification for Selection of

ATCS, AUS, FSDPS, Jacksonville, Fl Date: 2123193

From: Air Traffic Manager

Gainesville, Fl, AFSS Reply to

Attn of: :

To: Manager, Human Resources Division, ASO-10

After careful consideration of personal qualifications and

performance requirements for the vacant Automation

Specialist positions at the new Flight Service Data

Processing System (FSDPS) at Jacksonville ARTCC, I have

selected the following personnel.

Ms. Jacquline J. Leonard, ATCS Jacksonville, Fl, FSS

Mr. Buri W. Jones, ATCS Jacksonville, Fl, FSS

Mr. Harold C. Rogers, ATCS Jacksonville, Fl, FSS

Mr. Eric J. Strand, ATCS Gainesville, Fl, FSS

Our outreach efforts identified two females minorities and

three male minorities. Of these, one female minority , Ms. j

Lenard, and two of the male minorities, Mr. Rogers and Mr.

Strand were selected for the position. One male minority,

Mr. Cordero, and one female minority, Ms. Giles lacked the

automation experience for such a technical position.

Signed by

“4 S / “

William P. Dorminy

22

EXHIBIT C

AFFIDAVIT

STATE OF FLORIDA

COUNTY OF DUVAL ss:

I,WilliamP. Dorminy, am employed by the Federal

Aviation Administration as Manager of the Gainesville

Automated Flight Service Station located in

Gainesville, Florida hereby solemnly swear:

That in determining who should be selected for the

Automated Flight Service Specialist under Vacancy

announcement # ASO-93-14A-O9, I did not

discriminated against any of the applicants and in

particular Mr. Angel Cordero. In making the selection

I reviewed each individual's application package as

supplied by the Human Resource Division. I believe

that a close examination of the bids packages of all of

the candidates will reveal that those selected were

more qualified than Mr. Cordero.

Mr. Cordero's claim that he was not selected because

he is a minorities has not merit since 3 of the 4

candidates selected were minorities.

According to Mr. Cordero, he has received good rating

while working in the San Juan, Puerto Rico IFSS and

in Charleston AFSS. However, I am aware of his

performance problems at the Anderson, S.C. AFSS

and in Jacksonville FSS. Mr. Cordero did not "check

out" in the Anderson AFSS_ because his

communication skills were not satisfactory. Since I

never supervised Mr. Cordero, I have no first hand

knowledge of his communication deficiency, however,

I was told of Mr. Cordero failure in Andersen by Mr.

Victor Byrd and Mr. Mike Powerly of the southern

region Air Traffic Division. As -to why this was not a

23

problem in his previous facilities I can only speculate

that although his communication skills ware

acceptable to brief pilots in Puerto Rico area, they

were not sufficient in South Carolina or Florida area.

It may be possible that if I worked in Puerto Rico,

some people may have problem with my southern

drawl.

I. am aware of his performance problem in

Jacksonville. He is frequently late and have abuse his

- sick leave privileges. I understand that in many

occasions he has called in sick on the days

immediately following his RDO. This present a problem

to the supervisors because they would have to call in

another specialist on short notice. The position of

Automated Flight Service specialist demands for reliable

and capable individuals.

As for Mr. Cordero's claim of harassment, I believe it to be

without merit. During his stay in Anderson, he was given

many opportunity and special training in an effort to help

him qualify for. the available position. This was more than

what was required. The fact that he was also given the

opportunity to transfer to the a lower level facilities, with

PCS, at Jacksonville is another indication of the division's

willingness to help Mr. Cordero.

I would like to stress that at no time during this or any

other selection process did I fail to selected a candidate

because of his or her National Origin.

I have read the above statement, consisting of 2 pagers, and

it is true and complete to the best of my knowledge and

belief. I understand that the information I have given is not

considered confidential and that it may be shown to the

interested parties.

24

“as 44

Subscribed and sworn to before

me at Gainsville, Florida

on this 29 day of March 1994

25

EXHIBIT D

Summary. of Mr Carlos V. Otero, E.E.O.

Counselor for the D.O.T. F.A.A. Southern Region

signed 6/14/94.

Summary of Counselor’s inquiry.

Personal Contacts

a. Emeris Smitherman (Jacksonville FSS-ATM) 904-

641-7944

Mr. Smitherman advised Mr. Carlos Otero (EEO

Counselor) the Mr. Cordero went to some medical

appointments on government time while in

Jacksonville. Other appointments were in Charleston

S.C. Mr. Smitherman agreed with Mr. Cordero that

he was entitled to Workman’s Compensation. The

letter accusing Mr. Cordero of sick leave abuse was

typed and brought by Mr. Bill Dorminy from

Gainesville AFSS. The letter was signed by Mr.

William Rodenfels (Area Supervisor-JAX FSS), under

direct order from Mr. Dorminy.

b. William Rodenfels (Area Supervisor-JAX FSS)

904-641-8333. Mr. Rodenfels agreed with Mr.

Smitherman that Mr. Cordero went to some

medical appointment on government time while in

Jacksonville, Florida. Also, that Mr. Cordero was

- entitled to some Workman’s compensation. Also,

verified that the letter was signed by him (Mr.

Rodenfels), under direct order from Mr. Dorminy.

H) Summary of Informal resolutions attempt.

I) Mr. Emeris Smitherman and Mr. William |

Rodenfels, Jr. Agreed that Mr. Angel F. Cordero is

entitled to Workman Compensation and any

expenses incurred because of his allegation. Also,

Mr. Smitherman said that is not up to him to

make a decision to pay back Mr. Cordero, that is

26

up to Southern Region. And also, both, Mr.

Smithrman and Mr. Rodenfels agreed that the letter

that Mr. Rodenfels signed accusing Mr. Cordero of

sick leave abuse was brought by Mr. Dorminy. Mr.

Rodenfels signed this letter under direct order of

his superior (Mr. Bill Dorminy). Mr. Cordero if filing

a formal complaint.

“s/ : oe

Signature of the EEO Counselor, Mr. Carlos V. Otero

appears at the end of the Summary of information

27

EXHIBIT E

I

DECLARATION OF WILLIAM RODENFELS

I, William Rodenfels, declare the following to be "true and

correct:

1. I am currently employed as a supervisory Air Traffic

Control Specialist (ATCS) at the Gainesville Automated

Flight Service Station. I have worked for the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA or Agency) for the past 31

years. I have been a supervisor for the past 19.5 years.

2. From February 1979 to July 1994, I was. a supervisory

ATCS in the Jacksonville Flight Service Station (FSS). I was

Plaintiff's first line supervisor from 1990-94. I served as

Plaintiff's timekeeper during this time

period. As timekeeper, I was responsible for soil

Plaintiff sick and annual leave, signing off on his time and

attendance cards which are processed every two weeks by

the Agency, and taking appropriate steps to resolve any

time and attendance problems which came to my attention.

3. Plaintiff had a series of time and attendance problems

during the period of time I supervised him. Plaintiff

commuted to the Jacksonville FSS from Charleston, South

Carolina on a weekly basis. This is a 250 mile commute and

takes approximately five hours driving time. Consequently,

Plaintiff was often tardy in arriving at the Jacksonville

facility after his scheduled days off. Plaintiff's tardiness was

disruptive to the operation of the Jacksonville facility.

4. Plaintiff also had a problem with unscheduled absences.

He would often take sick days in conjunction with

regularity scheduled days off. I observed this pattern over a

period of ‘time and came to believe Plaintiff was abusing

his sick leave. I ,raised this issue with my management,

28

specifically Mr. Emeris Smitherman, my then-first line

supervisor. After much discussion, on August 3, 1992, I

issued Plaintiff a memorandum regarding sick leave abuse.

This memorandum informed Plaintiff that if he continued

to consistently take sick leave in conjunction with regularly

scheduled days off, he could be required to present a

medical certificate for each subsequent absence.

5. I have recently reviewed official Agency records

regarding leave taken by Plaintiff in 1988 through 1991.

During this time period, Plaintiff used more annual leave

than he earned in all years, and Plaintiff; used more sick

leave than he earned in 1988, 1989 and 1991. Exhibit 1.

6. During the 1990-92 time frame, I also supervised Ms.

Jacquline J. Lenard, Mr. Harold c. Rogers and Mr. Burl W.

Jones. These individuals were ultimately selected for the

Automation Specialist position, GS~2152-11/12, under

Vacancy Announcement No. ASO-1-2148. None of these

individuals had significant time and attendance problems.

Specifically, they had no problems with tardiness or

unscheduled absences. They did not consistently take sick

leave in conjunction with regularly scheduled days off.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true

and correct.

“S / “e

WILLIAM RODENFELS

Supervisory Air Traffic Contr. Sp.

Executed on this 19th of October 1998.

29

EXHIBIT F

DECLARATION OF WILLIAM P. DORMINY

I, William P. Dorminy, declare the following to be true

and correct:

1. 1am a retired Federal Aviation Administration (FAA

or Agency) employee with approximately 31 years of

service. I was a manager or supervisor with the FAA for

approximately 24 years. I have served as the selecting

official for numerous positions.

2. From August 1989 to May 1994, I was employed by

the FAA as manager of the Gainesville Automated Flight

Service Station (AFSS) located in Gainesville, Florida,.

During the same timeframe, I was also a Hub Manager for

the Flight Service Stations (FSS) at the following Northern :

Florida locations: Jacksonville, Tallahassee,. Crestview and

Pensacola. As Hub Manager, I had _ oversight

responsibilities for the above-mentioned FSSs. The

managers of these FSSs reported directly tome. —

3. Plaintiff was employed as a Air Traffic Control

Specialist (ATCS), GS-10, in Jacksonville FSS from 1990-94.

Prior to his employment in Jacksonville, he was employed

as an ATCS in the Anderson, South Carolina AFSS in 1989.

During his career, Plaintiff had also worked in the

Charleston, South Carolina and San Juan, Puer.to Rico FSSs.

4. As an ATCS, Plaintiff was responsible for giving

weather briefings to pilots on the ground in the preflight

position, performing weather observation functions,

processing flight-related information, providing notices to

airmen of outages in the national airspace system,

providing pilots in flight with weather, aeronautical, and

traffic flow information, and assisting pilots in distress.

30

5. I was Plaintiff's third level supervisor during the time

he worked in Jacksonville FSS. Mr. William Rodenfels was

Plaintiff's first level supervisor and Mr. Emeris Smitherman

was Plaintiff's second level supervisor and the Manager of

the Jacksonville FSS.

6. In conjunction with my responsibility of overseeing

the Jacksonville FSS, I met quite frequently with Mr.

Smitherman and, to a lesser extent, Mr. Rodenfels. Mr.

Smitherman briefed me frequently on personnel issues and

problems at the Jacksonville FSS. Mr. Smitherman talked to

me on several occasions about Plaintiff's time and

attendance problems. Specifically, Mr. Smitherman told me

that Plaintiff frequently had unscheduled absences which

were disruptive to the operation of the Jacksonville facility.

Mr. Smitherman also told me that Plaintiff’ commuted a

distance of approximately 250 miles from his home in

Charleston, South Carolina to Jacksonville. As a result of

this lengthy commute of approximately five hours, Mr.

Smitherman related to me that Plaintiff was often late to

work. ‘

7. Mr. Smitherman also told me that Plaintiff had a

habit of taking sick days in conjunction with regularly

scheduled days off and that he believed Plaintiff was

abusing his sick leave. This situation persisted for quite

some time and on August 3, 1992, Mr. Rodenfels issued

Plaintiff a memorandum regarding sick leave abuse in

which Plaintiff was informed that if he continued to

consistently take sick leave in conjunction with regularly

scheduled days off, he could be required to present a

medical certificate for each subsequent absence. Exhibit 1.

8. I was the selecting official for the Automated Flight

Service Station Specialist positions, GS-2152-11/12, on the

staff of the Flight Service Data Processing System (FSDPS)

31

in the Jacksonville Air Route Traffic Control Center

(ARTCC) in Hilliard, Florida. These positions were

advertised under Vacancy Announcement. No. ASO-1-2148

which was set forth on Vacancy List No. ASO-92-14-22 (AP-

9 Test) . The Vacancy Announcement opened on January 4,

1993.

9. On February 23, 1993, I selected the following four

individuals for these positions: Jacquline J. Lenard (African

American female), Harold C. Rogers (Native American

male), Burl W. Jones (White male), Eric J. Strand (Asian

Pacific male) .Exhibit 2. A total of 17 individuals applied-for

the positions. Id.

10. In order to be minimally qualified for a position as

an Automation Specialist at the Hilliard FSDPS, an

applicant needed to have worked for at least two years as a

full performance controller.! The applicant also needed to

have taken, as a prerequisite, coursework in automation

systems. Plaintiff met both of these prerequisites.

11. Beyond these minimal qualifications, I was seeking,

first and foremost, to select reliable individuals with a good

work ethic without significant time and attendance

problems. In addition, I was looking for

individuals with (1) a working knowledge of all flight

service station-related computer equipment and functions

so as to ensure the adequacy of automation support; (2) an

ability to rapidly gather, analyze and evaluate information

to make ‘recommendations; (3) an ability to communicate

with others effectively, both orally and in writing and (4) an

ability to get along with others.

12. In making my choices for the Automation Specialist

positions, I put a heavy emphasis on _ reliability,

dependability; work ethic, good attendance and punctuality

because of the staffing and the nature of the work being

32

performed at Hilliard. The FSDPS staff performs a very

important function in that they monitor and maintain the

mainframe computers at Hilliard that drive the the

Gainesville and St. Petersburg AFFSs.

13. The computers in Gainesville and St. Petersburg are

used for briefing pilots on weather conditions, processing

pilot flight plans into the system, processing notices to

airmen regarding outages in navigational systems, and law

enforcement assistance. The Gainesville and St. Petersburg

AFSSs are two of the busiest in the nation.

14. If a computer problem is experienced in Gainesville

or St. Petersburg, the Automation Specialist on duty at the

FSDPS in Hilliard is responsible for analyzing the problem

and taking immediate action to repair the problem, if

related to software, or to have it repaired, if related to

hardware. See Exhibit 3. If immediate action is not taken,

the Gainesville and St. Petersburg AFSSs could be

temporarily shut down, and the traffic relying on these

facilities would have to be transferred to surrounding

facilities. See id. This would increase the workload for

backup facilities, such as Macon, Georgia, Anderson, South

Carolina and Miami, Florida, and could cause delays for

pilots seeking to obtain pre-flight briefings. Air safety could

be impacted if a pilot flies into unforeseen weather because

s/he is unable, due to outages in the computer system, to

obtain a pre-flight briefing, as required by regulation. In

addition, airborne aircraft are not be able to obtain the latest

weather information in the event of Outages, as this

function cannot be transferred to other facilities.

15. Reliability and punctuality are also important

attributes for an individual selected for the Automation

Specialist position because of the manner in which

the FSDPS is staffed. The FSDPS is open 24 hours a

33

day. and, due to budgetary restrictions, the FSDPS

was only authorized to have one staff member on duty

during a given shift. Overtime in my organization was

extremely limited and had to be justified on a case by

case basis. My organization also had very limited

options for finding backups in the event an employee

scheduled for a particular shift was sick or on leave.

16. I did not select Plaintiff for the Automation

Specialist position because I did not believe he was

well-suited to work in the FSDPS for a number of

reasons. First, he had a reputation for being unreliable

and he had deficiencies in the areas of time and attendance

and tardiness. Plaintiff also had performance problems

communicated to me by his. supervisors and a poor

professional reputation in the Jacksonville facility. In

addition, I knew that Plaintiff's home and family were in

Charleston, South Carolina which was a five hour drive

from the Hilliard facility. Because of the distance of his

home from the facility, I would not have been able to rely

on Plaintiff to serve as aback up or to work overtime if he

were selected as an Automation Specialist. Because the

Hilliard FSDPS was minimally staffed, it was important to

me that all the individuals selected as Automation

Specialists be able to serve as a back up on short notice and

to work overtime in the event that one of the other

specialists was unexpectedly absent.

17. In making my decision not to select. Plaintiff for the

Automation Specialist position, I also took into

consideration the fact that he had not "checked out" at the

Anderson, South Carolina AFSS where he worked for seven

months prior to coming to Jacksonville. The Anderson

facility is the only automated facility Plaintiff has ever

worked in during his F~ career. All of the other facilities

Plaintiff has worked in have been manual facilities. In order ©

to "check out" at an automated facility such as Anderson, an

34

individual must become certified or proficient on the

following positions in the AFSS: Preflight, Flight Data,

Broadcast, Weather Observation, Notices to Airmen and In

Flight. In order to "check out, " an employee must have an

in-depth understanding of the automated equipment, so as

to be able to competently retrieve and display data and

then transmit it to the pilots. This ability requires a high

level of understanding of the operation of the automated

systems and their functions. It is not something that can be

fully mastered by taking a class or doing coursework.3 The

fact that Plaintiff was" unable to. function in an automated

environment at the Anderson AFSS caused me to become

concerned that he may have problems understanding

automated systems and working effectively at the FSDPS.

18. I have heard of Plaintiff's communications problems.

For instance, on a few occasions while visiting the

Jacksonville facility, I saw Plaintiff answer the phone and

hang it up immediately. When I inquired as to why this

was happening, I was told that pilots often call in for

weather briefings and then hang. up when Plaintiff

answers the phone because they cannot understand his

briefings because of his Puerto Rican accent.

19. Plaintiff's language skills were not a factor which I

seriously considered in deciding not to select him for the

Automation Specialist position. The Automation Specialist

position was different from the ATCS position Plaintiff held

in Jacksonville in that the Automation Specialist does not

have to give pilot briefings to the public. Rather, the

Automation Specialist must communicate with individuals

at various locations within the FAA to trouble shoot. and

repair computer outages. While language skills were of

some importance for the Automation Specialist position,

they were less important for the ATCS position Plaintiff

35

incumbered in Jacksonville. I believe Plaintiff's language

skills were sufficient to perform the duties of the

Automation Specialist position competently.

20. My selection decisions were made on the basis of the

applicants’ written application package, and discussions I

conducted with each of the applicants’ supervisors. I did

not interview any of the applicants. I also reviewed and

considered initial ratings the Agency personnel specialist

made prior to forwarding the application packages to me.

21. I had discussions regarding all of the applicants with

their supervisors. I inquired regarding the reliability,

dependability, work ethic, professional reputations, time

and attendance and punctuality of all of the applicants. The

applicants I selected had excellent professional reputations

in their respective FSSs and were highly reliable. None of

the applicants I selected had significant time and

attendance problems. All lived in the vicinity of Hilliard

and were readily available to work overtime and to serve as

a back-up.

22. During my professional career, I recall a number of

instances in which I attended national meetings for AFFS

managers in which there was that the services performed

by the FSDPS were so important that it was crucial to pick

the most highly reliable individuals for the job.

23. I am aware that Plaintiff/ is alleging that I

whispered in his left ear on or about March 7, 1993 in

Gainesville, Florida "don't waste your time, I know all

about you, I will never select you because you are a

Puerto Rican.” I strongly deny that I made this or any like

statement. I also deny that Plaintiff's national origin played

any role whatsoever in my decision not to select him as an

Automation Specialist.

36

24. During my career as a Supervisor at the FAA, a

number of individuals who were not selected for various

positions have approached me to learn why they were not

selected. I generally do not give these individuals specific

information about why they were not selected. Rather, I

refer them to their first line Supervisors to work on their

deficiencies.

25. During my career as an FAA supervisor, on two or

more. occasions, I have selected Puerto Ricans for job

vacancies. In approximately 1990, I selected Pedro Munoz

for an ATCS vacancy in Gainesville. In approximately 1984,

I selected Herbie Castro from the San Juan FSS to fill a

vacancy in the Fort Myers FSS.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing

is true and correct .

Ml 4

S

WILLIAM P. DORMINY

Executed on this 19TH of October 1998.

1 A “full performance controller" is an air traffic control specialist who is

certified to work the full range of shifts in his facility without a trainer or

a supervisor in the room.

2 While "checking out" at an automated facility was not a job

prerequisite, Plaintiff's inability to "check out" indicated to me that he

was not well-suited to working in the FSDPS environment. Plaintiff's

inability to "check out" led me to make the comment in my justification

memorandum that Plaintiff "lacked automation experience for such a

technical position ." Exhibit 4.

3 I am aware that Plaintiff successfully completed coursework on the

MIFC automation system which is in use at AFSSs. However, there is a

big difference between completing a course and being able to use,

trouble shoot and repair the MIFC system proficiently.

37

EXHIBIT G

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

AFFIDAVIT

COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO

COUNTY OF CAROLINA

I, Francisco Estrada Cotto, Air Traffic Manager, San Juan

Automated Flight Service Station, GS-2152-14, Federal

Aviation Administration, San Juan Puerto Rico, make the

following statement freely and voluntarily to Wilma

Rosenberg, who has identified herself to me as an EEO

INVESTIGATOR for the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

TRANSPORTATION, OST/DOCR, knowing that this

statement may be used in evidence. I understand that this

statement is not confidential and may be shown to any

interested party.

I HEREBY SOLEMNLY __ swear

(SWEAR OR AFFIRM)

1. I began working at this station in my current position in

December 1994. I have worked for the FAA since 1971. I

have worked in various positions. I am a Puerto Rican

male. I filed an EEO complaint in the end of 1978.

2. Victor Garcia briefed my about the situation involving

Mr. Cordero’s misuse of the SF 160 program before he

left. Victor told me that charges were being brought

against Angel Cordero for misusing the SF 160

program. He told me Victor Byrd, Operations Specialist

in ASO-540, was handling the matterin Atlanta.

(Victor Byrd is currently in Anniston). He said they had

38

an enormous amount of evidence against

My subsequent dealings were with Victor Byrd. When I

got a grievance from Cordero about this case, I would

sent them to Victor Bryd for response. Likewise, they

sent me the letter proposing his suspension, I signed it

and gave it to Cordero. When I got Cordero's response,

I sent it to Bryd. It was my understanding that

everything was worked out at the Regional level

between the Union and the Region. I was informed

that an agreement was made to reduce his suspension

from 20 days to 5 days. In my experience, if the Union

agreed to a 5 day suspension, they believed that the

program had been violated. There is no way that the

Union would go along with the suspension if the y

did not believe that there had been a violation. If they

go along with it, in my opinion there was sufficient

evidence of his wrongdoing. In my experience if the

Union thought they had the grain of hope that they

could win, they would fight it. Here, they didn't.

- With regard to the removal of his SF 160 privileges, I

was also instructed by the Region to suspend his

privileges for a period of two years. Two year is the

minimum mandatory Suspension period. I do not

remember whether I wrote the letter at their instruction

or they sent one to me for my signature. I did not do an

independent investigation before issuing this letter

either. I did not have access to the underlying facts and

circumstances; this all happened before Mr. Cordero

came to Puerto Rico .

- Nothing that was done here was done because of his

national origin or because he had prior EEO activity. I had

heard rumors that Cordero had filed EEO complaintssince I

became involved. At the time I signed these letters I was

39

not aware he had filed earlier EEO complaints.

6. The investigator has shown me the three page

document signed by Victor Byrd, dated October 25,

1994. This is the first time I have seen this document.

However, I was told that because they saw his car in the

parking lot every week, this is way they started the

investigation. Based on what I see here, he had taken 10

trips and they say there were more. As they are

different dates, if he went, I am assuming that he came

back. He was only allowed 8 trips.

PAGE 3 OF 3 PAGES, DEPONENT'S INITIALS

I HAVE READ THE ABOVE STATEMENT, CONSISTING

OF 3 PAGES, AND IT IS TRUE AND COMPLETE TO THE

BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. I

UNDERSTAND THAT THE INFORMATION I HAVE

GIVEN IS NOT TO BE CONSIDERED CONFIDENTIAL

AND THAT IT MAY BE SHOWN TO THE INTERESTED

PARTIES .

ug / “

DEPONENT’S SIGNATURE

SUBSCRIBED AND (SWORN TO) (AFFIRMED)

BEFORE ME AT San Juan

ON THIS 25th DAY OF January, 1996.

“ S / “4

(INVESTIGATOR’S SIGNATURE)

Investigator, U.S. Department of Transportation

DOCR/OST

40

EXHIBIT G2

Reprint of letter of Mr. Francisco Estrada-Cotto Acting

Air Traffic Manager San Juan IFSS, Puerto Rico

dated FEE 10 1995

LOGO

U.S. Department Southern Region P. 0. Box 20636

of Transportation Atlanta, Georgja

30320

Federal Aviation

Administration

FEB 10 1995

Mr. Angel Cordero

San Juan IFSS

San Juan, Puerto Rico

Dear Mr. Cordero:

My letter of December I, 1994, informed you of a proposal

to suspend you for 20 days for misuse of position for

personal gain.

I have given full consideration to the information you

presented in your written reply dated December 14, 1994. I

fmd that the specific reason in my letter of December 1,

1994, is fully supported by the evidence and warrant your

Suspension. However, as a result of a settlement agreement

between the National Association of Air Traffic Specialists,

Southern Region and the Federal Aviation Administration,

Southern Region, you will be suspended for five (5) days

effective March 6, 1995;

Sincerely,

Francisco Estrada- Cotto

41

Acting Air Traffic Manager

San Juan IFSS

RECEIVED BY: AFCordero

DATE: Feb 10 1995

Across the right hand margin bears the inscription

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT COPY

and in the

extreme lower right hand corner, the inscription:

Original mailed to ASO-16 on 2/10/96 CC

42

EXHIBIT _H

RECORD OF TELEPHONE CALL dated 8-31-94,

done by Ms. Grizzelie M. Canter as a follow up

investigation. In her capacity of San Juan IFSS

NAATS (National Association of Air Traffic Specialists)

Union Representative. Time 4:pm

Name of the person contacted: Mr. Tom Jones /

Continental Airlines 713-23-1077

Digest. } telephoned the familiarization travel]

representative to request information. I believe his

name was Tom Jones. I identified myself and told

him that I needed to document fam. Travel dates fm

one of our employees. Mr. Jones said. He was not

able to help me _ because it had been a while since

they kept records and therefore they had no records

that would say if any FAA person were on any specific

flight of any specific day.

“s/ “

Ms. Grizzelle M. Canter signature appears at the end

of this Record of Telephone Call.

43

EXHIBIT 1

RECORD OF TELEPHONE CALL, DATED 12/09/94

time 12:50pm. Done by Mrs. Grizzelle M. Canter San

Juan IFSS, San Juan Puerto Rico. In her capacity as an

official of the NAATS (National Association of Air Traffic

Specialists) Labor organization.

Name of person contacted, Mr. Tom Jones Continental

Airlines Tel: 713-233-1077

Subject. FAA Letter to ATCS Angel F. Cordero dated

December 1, 1994.

Digest:

This is a record of conversation with Mr. “TJ” Tom Jones,

of Continental Airlines, and “GC”< Grizzelle M. Canter, of

TJSJ IFSS. I telephoned Mr. Tom Jones in order to verify

information supplied by him to the FAA. I said to Mr.

Jones that it was mentioned on a letter to one of our

employees that he supplied computer data sheets and

manifests of specific flights that verify the names of the

jump seat rider on specific dates on continental flights, and

that Victor Byrd said the information was provided by Mr.

Tom Jones of Continental Airlines. The following record is

not verbatim, but is written to the best of my recollection,

and I am writing this immediately after our conversation.

GC: Can you provide this same information to me as well?

TJ: I don’t have this information because we don’t retain

these manifests. All I sent FAA was nothing more than a

telex provided to me by my people. It was not a manifest,

nor a permanent record. I know I gave them about five

dates, but I’m not sure.

GC: Mr. Cordero was given 10 specifications and we know

for a fact that on at least one of those days, he was at work.

Yet your name is mentioned on each specification on Mr.

44

Cordero’s letter.

TJ: The employee did use our service. He knew our

people. He probably was on an official SF-160 on the first

trip, but after that, my people let him (travel), not knowing

that he didn’t have the proper authorization. I know about

the FAM-TRIP Program because I was the Chief of the

Miami Tower. (other talk of his previous FAA experience)

-.-but if we let him (Cordero) get away with this, we

become party to this and we cannot legally let this go on,

we just can’t do that... You know that when the

(CONTINENTAL AIRLINES) employees at the field see an

FAA Badge, they think OH-OH, here come the COPS...

GC: Yes, I know at times when I fam, they think I’m on

investigator when I’m only on a FAM Trip...By the way, in

the past, I know Continental airlines does not-accept my

FAA Papers they say they don’t need them.

TJ: Yes, we do not usually collect them. Are you with EEO

or something?

GC: No, the NAATS Union REP was not present, and I

was asked to attend the meeting as a witness. Asa witness,

If the allegations are true, I would like to know, and if they

are not true, I also want to know.

by Doesn’t the FAA have

Papers or records of this?

GC: Yes, we have requested all information that we

believe will help us reply to the letter, but we only have 15

days, so I have telephoned you in order to help us expedite

a response. Could you provide me with the copy of the

telex you sent to Victor Byrd?

Tj: I don’t even know where it is...I provided nothing

more than just a teletype message...not a manifest , because

just like the FAA, we don’t keep those forever. 2

GC: Id like to read to you at least one of the specifications

on this letter.

TJ: Please...Go on...(I read Specifications Number 1 from

Cordero’s letter)

|

45

TJ: What? If my name is there, I’m involved. If I'm

involved, I need to consult the legal department.

GC: You are named on each specification like this, and

this complete action is...only based on whatever

information you provided to Victor Byrd.

TJ: Did FAA provide you with any other information?

GC: No, the letter is based on what you aid, so naturally I

telephoned you in order to obtain such manifest lists or

computer printouts from you, since all of the allegations

are based on what you said.

TJ: Would you please fax me a copy of this letter?

GC: Thank you very much for your time and attention to

this matter.

NAATS decided not to provide a fax copy at this time.

“s/ “se

Signed on 12/9/94 by ATCS Grizzelle M. Canter

EXHIBIT ]

Falsified Official Federal _documents.. will be hard to

duplicate and or reprint. However copies of the Originals

and even the Original will be submitted as evidence at the

Honorable Supreme Court requests.

a ———$__— -_—

APPENDIX

la

APPENDIX A

FILE COPY

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

FILED

February 21, 2001

No.00-2100

CA-99-3019-2-18AJ

CA-99-2580-2-18AJ

ANGEL F. CORDERO

Plaintiff -Appellant

V.

RODNEY E. SIATER, Secretary of Transportation

Defendant -Appellee

On Petition for Rehearing En Banc

The appellants petition for rehearing en banc was

submitted to this Court. As no member of this Court

requested a poll on the petition for rehearing en banc,

IT IS ORDERED that the petition for rehearing en banc is

denied.

For the Court,

/s/ Patricia S. Connor

CLERK

2a

APPENDIX B

UNPUBLI SHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No 00-2100

ANGEL F. CORDERO

Plaintiff -Appellant,

versus

RODNEY E. SLATER, Secretary of Transportation,

Defendant -Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District

of South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District

Judge. (CA-99-3019-2-18AJ, CA-99-2580-2-18AJ)

Submitted: December 14, 2000 Decided: December 21, 2000

Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and TRAXLER, Circuit

Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Angel F. Cordero, Appellant Pro Se. John Harris Douglas,

Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in the

circuit. See Local Rule 36 [c].

PER CURIAM:

3a

Angel F. Cordero appeals the district court's orders and

judgment granting summary judgment to the Secretary of

Transportation and dismissing his

employment discrimination complaint and denying his

motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record

and the district court's opinion accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and fmd no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of

the district court. See Cordero v. Slater, Nos. CA-99-3019-2-

18AJ (D.S.C. July 28 & Aug. 15, 2000). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

4a

APPENDIX C

(Stamped: F I L ED JUL 27, 2000

LARRY w. PROPES, CLERK

CHARLESTON, SC

Angel F. Cordero ) Civil Action No. 2:99-2580-18AJ31

and 2:99-3019-18AJ 26

Plaintiff,

vs. ORDER

Rodney E. Slater,

Secretary of Transportation,

Defendant.

The above refererice cases are before this court upon the

magistrate judge's recommendation the defendant's motion

for summary judgment be granted. Because plaintiff is

proceeding pro_se, this matter was referred to the

magistrate judge. 1 The record includes the report and

recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge mad

in accordance with this Court's Order of Reference and 28

U.S.C. #636(b)(1)(B).

This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review

of any portion of the magistrate judge's report to which

specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or

modify , in whole or in part, the recommendations

contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. #636(b) (1). However,

absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears

the Congress did not intend for the district court to review

the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge.

Thomas v Arn 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party

who fails to lie timely, written objections to the magistrate

judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. #636(b)(1) waves the

right to raise those objections at the appellate court level.

United States v Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert.

denied, 467 U.S. 120 (1984).2 Objections to the magistrate

5a

judge's report and recommendation were lied on July 14,

2000.

A review of the record indicates that the magistrate

judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the

applicable law. For the reasons articulated by the

magistrate judge, it is ordered that defendant's motion for

summary judgment is granted and both referenced cases

are hereby ended.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

“s/ “4

Signed by: David C. Norton

United States District Judge

Charleston, South Carolina

July 27, 2000

1: Pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 United States Code, #636(b)(1)

(B), and Local rule 19.02(b)(2)(D), D.S.C., the magistrate judge is

authorized to review all pretrial matters in cases filed under Title 42

United States Code, #1983, and submit findings and

recommendations to this Court.

2 In Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985), the court held "that a

pro _se litigant must receive fair notification of the consequences of

failure to object to a magistrate judge's report before such a procedural

default will result in waiver of the right to appeal. The notice must be

‘sufficiently understandable to one in appellant's circumstances fairly to

appraise him of what is required.” Id. At 846. Plaintiff was advised in a

clear manner that his objections had to be filed within ten ( 10) days, and

he received notice of the consequences at the appellate level of his failure

to object to the magistrate judge's report.

6a

APPENDIX D

(Stamped: entered 8/15/00 SCANNED)

FILED: AUG 15 2000

LARRY w. PROPES, CLERK CHARLESTON,SC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISCTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRIC OF SOUTH CAROLINA

CHARLESTON DIVISION

Angel F. Cordero, ) Civil Action No.2:99-2580-18AJ

)

33

) And 2:99-3019-18AJ 28

Plaintiff, )

V8. ) ORDER

)

)

Rodney E. Slater,

Secretary of Transportation,

Defendant.)

This matter is before this court on Plaintiffs Motion for

Reconsideration dated August 7, 2000. It is unclear to this

court whether this Motion has been filed or whether a copy

has been served on the attorneys for Defendant.

Nonetheless, Plaintiffs Motion must be denied.

On July 27, 2000 this court affirmed the Report and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. As noted on

page 2 of this court's order, it had received and considered

Plaintiffs Objections to the Report and Recommendation

which were filed with the Clerk of Court on July 14, 2000.

The Magistrate Judge exhaustively analyzed and accurately

summarized the position of both parties to this controversy

and recommended that Defendant's Motion for Summary

Judgment be granted. This court was charged with the

7a

conducted a de novo review of the Magistrate Judge's

Report and Recommendation and affirmed his decision.

After a reconsideration of all of the material submitted,

including Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration, this court

DENIES Plaintiffs Motion.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

Hg / “

David C. Norton

United States District Judge

Charleston, South Carolina

August 15, 2000