UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD 

BEVERLY WATTS DAVIS,

Appellant,

v.

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL 

AND COMMUNITY SERVICE,

Agency.

DOCKET NUMBER

DA-1221-13-0040-R-1

DATE: February 3, 2015

THIS FINAL ORDER IS NONPRECEDENTIAL*

Jessica L. Parks, Esquire, and Juliette M. Niehuss, Esquire, Washington, 

D.C., for the appellant.

Angela R. Williams, Esquire, Washington, D.C., for the agency.

BEFORE

Susan Tsui Grundmann, Chairman

Anne M. Wagner, Vice Chairman

Mark A. Robbins, Member

¶1 This case is before the Board on the parties’ joint request to reopen a final 

Board decision. MSPB Docket No. DA-1221-13-0040-W-1, Petition for Review 

(PFR) File, Tabs 7-8. For the reasons set forth below, we REOPEN the appeal 

under 5 C.F.R. § 1201.118, VACATE the Board’s Final Order, Watts Davis v. 

 

* A nonprecedential order is one that the Board has determined does not add 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 Parties may cite nonprecedential orders, 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

Corporation for National and Community Service, MSPB Docket No. DA-1221-

13-0040-W-1, Final Order (May, 22, 2014), and the administrative judge’s 

February 21, 2013 Initial Decision, see MSPB Docket No. DA-1221-13-0040-W1, Initial Appeal File, Tab 16, Initial Decision, and DISMISS the appeal as 

settled.

¶2 The parties reached a fully executed settlement agreement following 

issuance of the Board’s May 22, 2014 Final Order in this matter. MSPB Docket 

No. DA-1221-13-0040-R-1, Reopening File, Tab 1. The parties submitted a 

document entitled “SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT” signed and dated by the 

appellant on November 21, 2014, and by the agency on November 24, 2014. Id. 

The document provides, among other things, for the vacature of the Board’s 

May 22, 2014 Final Order, the administrative judge’s February 21, 2013 Initial 

Decision, and dismissal of the underlying individual right of action (IRA) appeal 

as settled. Id. at 1.

¶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, in fact, have entered into a settlement agreement, that they 

understand the terms, and that they understand that the Board will not retain 

enforcement authority over the provisions in this agreement. See Reopening

File, Tab 1 at 3. 

Accordingly, we reopen the IRA appeal in this matter, find it appropriate 

under the circumstances to VACATE the Board’s decisions dated February 21, 

2013, and May 22, 2014, and referenced herein, and DISMISS as settled the 

underlying IRA appeal “with prejudice to refiling” (i.e., the parties normally may 

not refile this appeal. 
3

¶4 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).

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 review of this final decision by the United 

States 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 than 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 
4

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 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 your court 

appeal, you may visit our website at http://www.mspb.gov/probono for a list of 

attorneys who have expressed interest in providing pro bono representation for 

Merit Systems Protection Board appellants before the court. The Merit Systems 

Protection Board neither endorses the services provided by any attorney nor 

warrants that any attorney will accept representation in a given case.

FOR THE BOARD:

Washington, D.C.

______________________________

William D. Spencer

Clerk of the Board