T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T A N TH O N Y L. W I LLI A M S, P et i t i on er , v. UN I T E D S T AT E S DE P AR T ME NT OF LA BO R, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 10- 71595 L A B R N o. 08- 063 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the D e partm e ntof

L abor S ubm i tt e d A ugus t11, 2011 ** B efo re: T H O M A S , S IL V E R M A N , an dC L IF T O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. A nthonyL . W i l l i a m s pe t i t i ons pr o s e f orr e vi e w of

the D e partm e ntof L abor’ s A dm i ni strat i ve R evi ew B oard (“ A R B ”) order denyi ng hi s c om pl ai ntun der the W hi s t l e bl ow e rP r ot e c t i on P r ovi s i on of the W e nde l l H . F or d A vi a t i on I n v e s tm e n t an dR e f

o rm A c t f

o rth e 2 1 s t C e n tu ry( “A I R 2 1 ” ) , 4 9 U .S .C . § 4 2 1 2 1 .



# FI LED AU G 17 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 71595 2 W e h av e ju risd icti o n u n d er4 9 U .S .C . § 4 2 1 2 1 (b )( 4 )( A ). W e r ev iew th e A R B ’s d e c is io n p u r s u an t to th e A d m in is tr a tiv e P r o c e du r e A c t ( “A P A ” ) . I d. U nde rthe A P A , “ th e A R B ’ s l eg al co n cl u si o n s m u stb e su st ai n edu n l ess th ey are arb i trary, c ap r ic io u s , an ab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n , o ro th e rw is e n o t in a c c o r d an c e w ith law , an dits fi nd i ng s of f

ac tm ustbe sust ai ned u nl es s they are un supp ort ed by subst ant i al evi dence i n the re cord as a w ho l e. ” Calm at C o. v . U . S. D e p’ t of L abor , 364 F . 3d 1117, 1121 ( 9th C i r . 2004) . W e de nythe pe t i t i on. T he A R B prop er l y deni ed W i l l i am s’ s c om pl ai ntas un t i m el y and concl ud ed th a t e q u itab le p r in c ip le s d idn o t ap p lyto to ll th e lim ita tio n s p e r io d . See 2 9 C. F. R. § 1 9 7 9 .1 0 3 ( d ) ( r e q u ir in g ac o m p la in an t f ile a n a d m in is tr a tiv e c o m p la in t “[ w ]ith in 9 0 d a y s a f

te ra n a lle g e dv io la tio n o f [ A I R 2 1 ] o c c u r s ” ) ; Stol l v . R uny on , 165 F . 3d 1 2 3 8 , 1 2 4 2 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 9 9 ) ( “E q u itab le to llin g ap p lie s w h e n th e p la in tif f is p r e v e n te df

r o m a s s e rtin g ac la im b yw r o n g f u l c o n du c t o n th e p art o f th e d e f e n d an t, o rw h e n e x tr a o r d in aryc ir c u m s tan c e s b e y o n dth e p la in tif f’s c o n tr o l m a d e it im p o s s ib le to f

ile ac la im o n tim e .” ) ; V enez uela v. Kraf

t , Inc. , 801 F . 2d 1170, 11 74 -75 (9th C i r. 19 86 ) ( equi t abl e t ol l i ng i s w arrant ed w here the pl ai nt i ff show ed du e d ilig e n c e in p u r s u in g h is c la im in th e w r o n g f o ru m ) , am ended , 815 F . 2d 570 ( 1 9 8 7 ) . W i l l i am s’ s r em ai ni ng cont ent i on s are un pers uasi ve.10- 71595 3 W e de nyW i l l i a m s ’ s “ M ot i on t o f i l e M ot i on of

S um m aryD i s pos i t i on B e y o n dB r ie f

in g P e r io d ,” f

ile do n M ar c h 9 , 2 0 1 1 . See 9th C i r. R . 3-6. W e deny a s m o o t W illia m s ’s Ju ly6 , 2 0 1 1 r e q u e s t f o rd e te rm in a tio n . P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.