Case ID: f-appx_533/html/1000-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Pamela R. JONES, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Respondent.
    No. 2013-3169.
    United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
    Oct. 2, 2013.
    Pamela R. Jones, Converse, TX, pro se.
    Director, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice Department of Justice Washington, DC, for Respondent.
   ORDER

Upon review of this recently docketed appeal, it appears that Pamela R. Jones’ appeal was not timely filed.

On May 30, 2013, the Merit Systems Protection Board (Board) issued a final order dismissing her case for lack of jurisdiction. The court received her notice of appeal on July 31, 2013; 62 days after the Board issued its decision.

Our review of a Board decision or order is governed by 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1), which provides in relevant part that “[n]ot-withstanding any other provision of law, any petition for review shall be filed within 60 days after the Board issues notice of the final order or decision of the Board.” 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1)(A). This filing period is “statutory, mandatory, [and] jurisdictional.” Monzo v. Dep’t of Transp., 735 F.2d 1335, 1336 (Fed.Cir.1984); see also Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 127 S.Ct. 2360, 168 L.Ed.2d 96 (2007) (the timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement that cannot be waived).

Accordingly,

It Is Ordered That:

(1) Jones is directed to show cause, within 21 days of the date of filing of this order, why this appeal should not be dismissed as untimely. The Department of the Army may also respond within that time.

(2) The briefing schedule is stayed.