Court Opinion

ID: 9892904
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-25 15:01:03.908054+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:49:01.354326
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-1531    Document: 21     Page: 1    Filed: 10/25/2023

           NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                  ______________________

                  RAYMOND F. JUSTIS,
                      Petitioner

                             v.

          DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
                     Respondent
               ______________________

                        2023-1531
                  ______________________

    Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection
 Board in No. PH-0752-16-0188-I-1.
                 ______________________

 PER CURIAM.
                         ORDER
     Having considered the responses to this court’s
 July 27, 2023, order to show cause, we now transfer the
 case to the United States District Court for the Eastern
 District of Pennsylvania.
     This court has jurisdiction to review final decisions of
 the Merit Systems Protection Board except in “[c]ases of
 discrimination subject to the provisions of [5 U.S.C.
 §] 7702,” 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2), involving an allegation of
 an action appealable to the Board and an allegation of cov-
 ered discrimination. See 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1); 28 U.S.C.
Case: 23-1531     Document: 21      Page: 2     Filed: 10/25/2023

 2                      JUSTIS v. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

 § 1295(a)(9). Those cases belong instead in federal district
 court. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2); Perry v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd.,
 582 U.S. 420 (2017); Diggs v. Dep’t of Hous. & Urb. Dev.,
 670 F.3d 1353, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2011). Here, consistent with
 record evidence, see, e.g., ECF No. 20 at 70, the Board noted
 that Raymond F. Justis was challenging his removal based,
 in part, on allegations of retaliation for Equal Employment
 Opportunity activities, and Mr. Justis’ filings with this
 court indicate he continues to seek review of his discrimi-
 nation claim. Thus, we lack jurisdiction over this case.
      Where we lack jurisdiction, and if it is in the interest of
 justice, we shall transfer a case to an appropriate court. 28
 U.S.C. § 1631. Mr. Justis requests transfer to the United
 States District Court for the District of Maryland (the dis-
 trict where he is currently incarcerated), but that does not
 appear to be a proper venue. See 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2)
 (“Cases of discrimination subject to the provisions of sec-
 tion 7702 of this title shall be filed under section 717(c) of
 the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e–16(c)) . . . .”);
 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–16(c) (specifying a federal employee or
 applicant “may file a civil action as provided in section
 2000e-5”); 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3) (providing that suit
 may be brought “[i]n any judicial district in the State in
 which the unlawful employment practice is alleged to have
 been committed, in the judicial district in which the em-
 ployment records relevant to such practice are maintained
 and administered, or in the judicial district in which the
 aggrieved person would have worked but for the alleged
 unlawful employment practice, but if the respondent is not
 found within any such district, such an action may be
 brought within the judicial district in which the respondent
 has his principal office”). Instead, we conclude that trans-
 fer to the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
 trict of Pennsylvania (where Mr. Justis worked prior to his
 removal) is appropriate.
     Accordingly,
Case: 23-1531    Document: 21     Page: 3    Filed: 10/25/2023

 JUSTIS v. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE                       3

    IT IS ORDERED THAT:
    This matter and all of the filings are transmitted to the
 United States District Court for the Eastern District of
 Pennsylvania pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
                                              FOR THE COURT

 October 25, 2023
      Date