Document #: 2021309 v 1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD 

JAMES R. ALONZO,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS,

Agency.

DOCKET NUMBER

DA-0714-18-0395-I-1

DA-0714-18-0513-I-1

DATE: May 12, 2023

THIS FINAL ORDER IS NONPRECEDENTIAL1

Jeremy Gilbreath, Esquire, San Antonio, Texas, for the appellant.

Robert C. Burlison, III, Esquire, San Antonio, Texas, for the agency.

BEFORE

Cathy A. Harris, Vice Chairman

Raymond A. Limon, Member

FINAL ORDER

¶1 The appellant has petitioned for review of the November 2, 2018 initial 

decision in these joined appeals. Alonzo v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 

MSPB Docket No. DA-0714-18-0395-I-1, Initial Appeal File (0395 IAF), 

 

1 A nonprecedential order is one that the Board has determined does not add 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 Parties may cite nonprecedential orders, 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

Tab 312; Petition for Review (0395 PFR) File, Tab 1. For the reasons set forth 

below, we DISMISS these appeals as settled.

¶2 After the filing of the petition for review, the parties submitted a document 

entitled “SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT” signed and dated by the appellant on 

March 10, 2023, and by the agency on March 15, 2023. 0395 PFR File, Tab 3 

at 6-9. The document provides, among other things, for the withdrawal of the 

appellant’s petition for review in the above-captioned appeals. Id. at 6.

¶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, 107-08 

(1997); see 5 C.F.R. § 1201.41(c)(2)(i) (providing that a settlement agreement 

will be made a part of the record, and the Board will retain jurisdiction to ensure 

compliance, if the parties offer it for inclusion into the record and the judge 

approves it). In addition, before accepting a settlement agreement into the record

for enforcement purposes, the Board must determine whether the agreement is

lawful on its face and whether the parties freely entered into it. See Delorme,

124 M.S.P.R. 123, ¶¶ 10-11.

¶4 Here, we find that the parties have entered into a settlement agreement, 

understand its terms, and intend for the agreement to be entered into the record 

for enforcement by the Board. 0395 PFR File, Tab 3 at 4-9. Accordingly, we 

find that dismissing the appeal with prejudice to refiling (i.e., the parties 

normally may not refile this appeal) is appropriate under these circumstances. In 

 

2

The administrative judge joined MSPB Docket No. DA-0714-18-0395-I-1 and MSPB 

Docket No. DA-0714-18-0513-I-1 in an October 17, 2018 order. 0395 IAF, Tab 30. 

MSPB Docket No. DA-0714-18-0395-I-1 is designated as the lead case, and subsequent 

citations to the record will be to this docket number. 
3

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.

¶5 In light of the foregoing, we find that dismissing the petition for review 

with prejudice to refiling (i.e., the parties normally may not refile this appeal) is 

appropriate under these circumstances. 

¶6 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). 

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 OF APPEAL RIGHTS3

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 

 

3

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 most appropriate in any matter.
4

statement of how courts will rule regarding which case s 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. Failure 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 questions 

about whether a particular forum is the appropriate one to review your case, you 

should contact that forum for more information. 

(1) Judicial review in general. As a general rule, an appellant seeking 

judicial review of a final Board order must file 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. 

§ 7703(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.

Washington, 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 

contained 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 for information regarding pro bono representation 

for Merit Systems Protection Board appellants before the Federal Circuit. The 
5

Board neither endorses the services provided by any attorney nor warrants that 

any attorney will accept representation in a given 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 part, 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 Circuit), within 30 calendar days after you 

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

Protection Board, 582 U.S. 420 (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 discrimination 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.uscourts.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 
6

with the EEOC no later than 30 calendar days after your representative receives

this decision. 

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 the EEOC via commercial delivery or 

by a method requiring a signature, it must be addressed to: 

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 protected 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 prohibited 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 Circuit or any court of appeals of 

competent jurisdiction.4 The court of appeals must receive your petition for 

 

4

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, 2018, 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. 
7

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 

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 

contained 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 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 given case. 

 

The All Circuit Review Act is retroactive to November 26, 2017. Pub. L. No. 115 -195, 

132 Stat. 1510. 
8

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