NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

CLARENCE EDWARD BALDWIN,

Petitioner

v.

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY,

Respondent

______________________

2024-1332

______________________

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection 

Board in No. DC-315H-20-0077-I-1.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

Before CHEN, LINN, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

O R D E R

On January 31, 2024, this court issued a show cause 

order directing the parties to address whether this court 

had jurisdiction. The Department of Energy (“DOE”) responds urging transfer. Clarence Edward Baldwin appears 

to assert in his motion (ECF No. 12) that this court has jurisdiction, and he files a corrected statement concerning 

Case: 24-1332 Document: 14 Page: 1 Filed: 04/12/2024
2 BALDWIN v. ENERGY

discrimination purporting to abandon his discrimination 

claims.

Mr. Baldwin filed an Equal Employment Opportunity 

(“EEO”) complaint with DOE alleging discriminatory personnel actions including alleged termination. DOE found 

no discrimination. Mr. Baldwin appealed that decision to 

the Merit Systems Protection Board, and, on November 22, 2019, the Board’s administrative judge issued an 

initial decision dismissing for lack of jurisdiction, which the 

Board affirmed. Mr. Baldwin seeks this court’s review of 

the Board’s decision.

Separately, Mr. Baldwin pursued review of the 

agency’s EEO decision with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which affirmed on July 12, 2021. On 

October 8, 2021, Mr. Baldwin filed suit in the United States

District Court for the District of Columbia, requesting, 

among other things, an order “directing the Defendant to 

promote the Plaintiff to the position of GS-13 with back pay 

and benefits.” Baldwin v. Granholm, No. 21-cv-2646, Dkt. 

No. 1 at 8 (D.D.C. Oct. 8, 2021). That case remains pending. 

This court lacks jurisdiction over Mr. Baldwin’s petition for review. Federal district courts, not this court, have 

jurisdiction over “[c]ases of discrimination subject to the 

provisions of [5 U.S.C. §] 7702,” 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2)—i.e.,

where an employee has made a non-frivolous allegation regarding an action appealable to the Board and that the action was based, at least in part, on covered discrimination. 

Perry v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 582 U.S. 420, 437 (2017). 

Before the Board, Mr. Baldwin pursued discrimination 

claims raised in his EEO complaint. Now, Mr. Baldwin’s 

corrected statement concerning discrimination indicates 

that he “wish[es] to abandon those discrimination claims 

and only pursue civil-service claims in the Federal Circuit 

rather than pursu[e] discrimination claims and civil-service claims in district court,” ECF No. 12-2 at 19–21. 

Case: 24-1332 Document: 14 Page: 2 Filed: 04/12/2024
BALDWIN v. ENERGY 3

However, Mr. Baldwin has not actually abandoned his discrimination claims; he simply seeks to pursue them in his 

pending district court case instead. That is not permitted. 

“Congress did not direct or contemplate bifurcated review” 

under these circumstances, Williams v. Dep’t of Army, 715 

F.2d 1485, 1490 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (en banc), so “a petitioner 

cannot challenge the non-discrimination issues here while 

challenging the discrimination issues in district court,” 

Punch v. NASA, No. 2016-1804, ECF No. 28 at 4 (Fed. Cir. 

Apr. 26, 2017). 

Under the circumstances, we agree with DOE that we 

lack jurisdiction because Mr. Baldwin is seeking overlapping relief from both this court and the district court. We 

further agree with DOE that transfer to the United States

District Court for the District of Columbia (the district 

where Mr. Baldwin was employed and where his discrimination claims are pending) is appropriate. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1631.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) ECF No. 12 is denied.

(2) This matter and all its filings are transferred to the 

United States District Court for the District of Columbia 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.

April 12, 2024

 Date

FOR THE COURT

Case: 24-1332 Document: 14 Page: 3 Filed: 04/12/2024