UNITED STATES OF AME RICA MERIT SYSTEMS PROTEC TION BOARD

DARREN MUHAMMAD, SR. ,

Appellant,

v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERA NS AFFAIRS, Agency. DOCKET NUMBER CH

- 0714

- 19

- 0358

- I

- 1

DATE: May 4, 2023



### THIS FINAL ORDER IS NONPRECEDENTIAL 1

Darren Muhammad, Sr. , Pike Road, Alabama, pro se. Amber Groghan and Nicholas Kennedy , Akron, Ohio, for the agency.

BEFORE Cathy A. Harris, Vice Chairman Raymond A. Limon, Member

FINAL ORDER ¶1 The appellant has petitioned for review of the October 1, 2019 initial
decision affirming his removal

. Initial Appeal File, Tab 36 , Initial Decision

at 1

- 2, 16 ; Petition for Review (PFR) File, Tab 1. For the reasons set forth below, we DISMISS the appeal as settled.

1 A nonprecedential order is one that the Board has determined does not add significantly to the body of MSPB case law. Parties may cite nonprecedential orders, but such orders have no precedential value; the Board and administrative judges are not required to follow or dis tinguish them in any future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

¶2 After the filing of the petition for review, the parties submitted a document
entitled “ SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ” signed and dated by the appellant and the agency on March 7, 2023

. PFR File, Tab 4 at 4

- 6. The document provides, among other things, that the a ppellant would withdraw his MSPB appeal. Id.

at 5. ¶3 The Board retains jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement if it has been entered into the record for that purpose. Delorme v. Department of the
Interior , 124 M.S.P.R. 123 , ¶¶ 16, 21 (2017). If the parties enter an agreement into the record and it is approved by the administrative judge, it will be enforceable by the Board unless the parties clearly specify that they do not want
Board enforcement. Stewart v. U.S. Postal Service
, 73 M.S.P.R. 104 , 107

- 0 8 (1997); see 5 C.F.R. § 1201.41 (c)(2)(i) (provid ing that a settlement agreement will be made a part of the record, and the Board will retain jurisdiction to ensure compliance, if the par ties offer it for inclusion into the record and the judge approves it). ¶4 Here, we find that the parties have ente red a settlement agreement into the
record and understand its terms

. PFR File, Tab 4 at 4

- 6 . Additionally , although the agreement is silent c oncerning whether the parties intend for the Board to retain enforcement authority, nothing in the agreement clearly specifies that the parties do not wish for the Board to retain enforcement authority over the agreement. See Stewart , 73 M.S.P.R. at 107

- 08; 5 C.F.R. § 1201.41 (c)(2)(i)

. In addition, we find that the agreement is lawful on its face and freely entered into, and we accept the settlement agreement into the record for enforcement

purposes. Accordingly, we find that dismissing the appeal with prejudice to refiling (i.e., the parties normally may not refile this appeal) is appropri ate under
these circumstances. ¶5 This is the final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board in this appeal. Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section 1201.113 ( 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 ).3

NOTICE TO THE PARTIE S OF THEIR ENFORCEMENT RIGHTS If the agency or the appella nt 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 OF APPEAL RIG HTS 2 You may obtain review of this final decision. 5 U.S.C. § 7703 (a)(1 ). By statute, the nature of your claims determines the time limit for seeking such review and the appropriate forum with which to file. 5 U.S.C. § 7703 (b). Although we offer the following summary of available appeal rights, the Merit Systems Protection Board does not provide legal advice on which option is most appropriate for your situation and the rights described below do not represent a statement of how courts will rule regarding which cases fall within their jurisdiction. If you wish to seek review of this final decision, you should immediately review the law applicable to your claims and carefully follow all filing time limits and requirements. Failu re to file within the applicable time limit may result in the dismissal of your case by your chosen forum. Please read carefully each of the three main possible choices of review below to decide which one applies to your particular case. If you have que stions about whether a particular forum is the appropriate one to review your case, you
should contact that forum for more information.

2 Since the issuance of the initial decision in this matter, the Board may have updated the notice of review rights included in final decisions. As indicated in the notice, the Board cannot advise which option is mos t appropriate in any matter.4

(1) Judicial review in general . As a general rule, an appellant seeking judicial review of a final Board order must f ile a petition for review with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which must be received by the court
within 60 calendar days of the date of issuance of this decision. 5 U.S.C. § 7 703 (b)(1)(A). If you submit a petition for review to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, you must submit your petition to the court at the following address: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 717 Madison Place, N.W. Washin gton, D.C. 20439 Additional information about the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit 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

con tained within the court ’ s Rules of Practice, and Forms 5, 6, 10, 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/probon o for information regarding pro bono representation for Merit Systems Protection Board appellants before the Federal Circuit. The Board neither endorses the services provided by any attorney nor warrants that any attorney will accept representation in a g iven case.
(2) Judicial or EEOC review of cases involving a claim of
discrimination . This option applies to you only if you have claimed that you were affected by an action that is appealable to the Board and that such action was based, in whole or in p art, on unlawful discrimination. If so, you may obtain judicial review of this decision

— including a disposition of your discrimination
claims

— by filing a civil action with an appropriate U.S. district court ( not the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal C ircuit), within 30 calendar days after you5

receive this decision. 5 U.S.C. § 7703 (b)(2); see Perry v. Merit Systems
Protection Board
, 582 U.S.

____ , 137 S. Ct. 1975 (2017). If you have a representative in this case, and your representative receives this decision before you do, then you must file with the district court no later than 30 calendar days after your representative receives this decision. If the action involves a claim of
disc rimination based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or a disabling condition, you may be entitled to representation by a court

- appointed lawyer and to waiver of any requirement of prepayment of fees, costs, or other security. See
42 U.S.C. § 2000e

- 5 (f) and 29 U.S.C. § 794a

. Contact information for U.S. district courts can be found at their respective websites, which can be accessed through the link below: http://www.uscou rts.gov/Court_Locator/CourtWebsites.aspx

. Alternatively, you may request review by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) of your discrimination claims only, excluding
all other issues

. 5 U.S.C. § 7702 (b)(1). You must file any such request with the
EEOC ’ s Office of Federal Operations within 30 calendar days after you receive
this decision. 5 U.S.C. § 7702 (b)(1). If you have a representative in this case, and your representative receives this decision before you do, then you must file
with the EEOC no later than 30 calendar days after your representative receives
this decis ion. If you submit a request for review to the EEOC by regular U.S. mail, the
address of the EEOC is: Office of Federal Operations

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

P.O. Box 77960 Washington, D.C. 20013 If you submit a request for review to t he EEOC via commercial delivery or by a method requiring a signature, it must be addressed to:6

Office of Federal Operations Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

131 M Street, N.E. Suite 5SW12G Washington, D.C. 20507
(3) Judicial review pursuant to the Whistleblower Protection
Enhancement Act of 2012 . This option applies to you only if you have raised claims of reprisal for whistleblowing disclosures under 5 U.S.C. § 2302 (b)(8) or other p rotected activities listed in 5 U.S.C. § 2302 (b)(9)(A)(i), (B), (C), or (D). If so, and your judicial petition for review “ raises no challenge to the Board ’ s disposition of allegations of a prohib ited personnel practice described in section 2302(b) other than practices described in section 2302(b)(8), or 2302(b)(9)(A)(i), (B), (C), or (D), ” then you may file a petition for judicial review either with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circui t or any court of appeals of competent jurisdiction. 3 The court of appeals must receive your petition for
review within 60 days of the date of issuance of this decision. 5 U.S.C. § 7703 (b)(1)(B). If you submit a petition for judicial review to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, you must submit your petition to the court at the following address: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 717 Madison Place, N.W. Washington , D.C. 20439

3 The original statutory provision that provided for judicial review of certain whistleblower claims by any court of appeals of competent jurisdiction expired on December 27, 2017. The All Circuit Review Act, signed into law by the President on July 7, 201 8, permanently allows appellants to file petitions for judicial review of MSPB decisions in certain whistleblower reprisal cases with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or any other circuit court of appeals of competent jurisdiction. The Al l Circuit Review Act is retroactive to November 26, 2017. Pub. L. No. 115

- 195, 132 Stat. 1510.7

Additional information about the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit 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
contain ed within the court ’ s Rules of Practice, and Forms 5, 6, 10, 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 fo r information regarding pro bono representation for Merit Systems Protection Board appellants before the Federal Circuit. The Board neither endorses the services provided by any attorney nor warrants that any attorney will accept representation in a given case. Contact information for the courts of appeals can be found at their respective websites, which can be accessed through the link below: http://www.uscourts.gov/Court_Locator /CourtWebsites.aspx

.

FOR THE BOARD:

Washington, D.C. /s/ for Jennifer Everling Acting Clerk of the Board