Teresa K. Day v. Office of Personnel Management ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                            UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
    MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD
    TERESA K. DAY,                                  DOCKET NUMBER
    Appellant,                  DA-0841-16-0297-I-1
    v.
    OFFICE OF PERSONNEL                             DATE: November 21, 2016
    MANAGEMENT,
    Agency.
    THIS FINAL ORDER IS NONPRECEDENTIAL *
    James R. Hefflin, Newport Beach, California, for the appellant.
    Sarah Murray, Washington, D.C., for the agency.
    BEFORE
    Susan Tsui Grundmann, Chairman
    Mark A. Robbins, Member
    FINAL ORDER
    ¶1         The appellant has filed a petition for review of the March 27, 2016 initial
    decision in this case, which dismissed his appeal for lack of jurisdiction . Initial
    Appeal File, Tab 8; Petition for Review (PFR) File, Tab 1.               During later
    settlement discussions, the appellant decided to withdraw the petition for review
    *
    A nonprecedential order is one that the Board has determined does not add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 Parties may cite nonprecedential orders,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
    and submitted a letter to that effect.        PFR File, Tab 5.     The agency has not
    objected to the appellant’s request to withdraw the petition for review. 
    Id.
    ¶2        Finding that withdrawal is appropriate under these circumstances, we
    DISMISS the petition for review as withdrawn with prejudice to refiling.
    ¶3        The initial decision of the administrative judge is final. Title 5 of the Code
    of Federal Regulations, section 1201.113 (
    5 C.F.R. § 1201.113
    ).
    NOTICE TO THE APPELLANT REGARDING
    YOUR FURTHER REVIEW RIGHTS
    You have the right to request review of this final decision by the U.S.
    Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. You must submit your request to the
    court at the following address:
    United States Court of Appeals
    for the Federal Circuit
    717 Madison Place, N.W.
    Washington, DC 20439
    The court must receive your request for review no later tha n 60 calendar days
    after the date of this order. See 
    5 U.S.C. § 7703
    (b)(1)(A) (as rev. eff. Dec. 27,
    2012). If you choose to file, be very careful to file on time. The court has held
    that normally it does not have the authority to waive this statutory deadline and
    that filings that do not comply with the deadline must be dismissed. See Pinat v.
    Office of Personnel Management, 
    931 F.2d 1544
     (Fed. Cir. 1991).
    If you need further information about your right to appeal this decision to
    court, you should refer to the Federal law that gives you this right. It is found in
    title 5 of the United States Code, section 7703 (
    5 U.S.C. § 7703
    ) (as rev. eff.
    Dec. 27, 2012). You may read this law as well as other sections of the United
    States     Code,     at   our     website,   http://www.mspb.gov/appeals/uscode.htm.
    Additional         information      is    available    at    the    court’s   website,
    www.cafc.uscourts.gov. Of particular relevance is the court’s “Guide for Pro Se
    3
    Petitioners and Appellants,” which is contained within the court’s Rules of
    Practice, and Forms 5, 6, 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
    Merit Systems Protection Board neither endorses the services provide d by any
    attorney nor warrants that any attorney will accept representation in a given case.
    FOR THE BOARD:                            ______________________________
    Jennifer Everling
    Acting Clerk of the Board
    Washington, D.C.
    

Document Info

Filed Date: 11/21/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021