Court Opinion

ID: 9895251
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-06 16:02:33.01117+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:46.570471
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-2289    Document: 13     Page: 1    Filed: 11/06/2023

           NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                  ______________________

             CAMERRON L. BRADBERRY,
                    Petitioner

                             v.

         DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE,
                    Respondent
              ______________________

                        2023-2289
                  ______________________

    Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection
 Board in No. DE-1221-23-0108-W-1.
                 ______________________

                      ON MOTION
                  ______________________

     Before LOURIE, MAYER, and STARK, Circuit Judges.
 PER CURIAM.
                         ORDER
     Camerron L. Bradberry moves for leave to proceed in
 forma pauperis. The Department of the Air Force moves to
 dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction. Mr. Bradberry
 has not responded.
     On August 11, 2023, Mr. Bradberry filed a timely peti-
 tion for the Merit Systems Protection Board’s review of an
Case: 23-2289      Document: 13      Page: 2     Filed: 11/06/2023

 2                                      BRADBERRY v. AIR FORCE

 administrative judge’s initial decision denying Mr. Brad-
 berry’s request for corrective action. Also on August 11,
 2023, this court received Mr. Bradberry’s petition to review
 the same initial decision.
      This court does not yet have authority to decide this
 case. Although this court has jurisdiction to review final
 orders or final decisions of the Board, see 28 U.S.C.
 § 1295(a)(9); see also Weed v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 571 F.3d
 1359, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2009), Mr. Bradberry’s pending
 timely petition at the Board renders the initial decision
 non-final for purposes of our jurisdiction. See 5 U.S.C.
 § 7701(e)(1)(A) (providing that the initial decision does not
 become final if a party timely petitions the Board for re-
 view); 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113(a) (“The initial decision will not
 become the Board’s final decision if within the time limit
 for filing . . . any party files a petition for review . . . .”).
      As the Air Force notes, two potential paths to this
 court’s review are available to Mr. Bradberry. First, Mr.
 Bradberry may wait to receive a final determination from
 the Board on his petition, at which point Mr. Bradberry
 may, if necessary, seek this court’s review by filing a timely
 petition here. Alternatively, Mr. Bradberry may file a mo-
 tion at the Board to withdraw his petition pursuant to the
 June 2022 policy on the Board’s website. * Under that pol-
 icy, the Clerk of the Board may grant requests to withdraw
 a petition for review when there is no apparent issue of un-
 timeliness with the petition and no other party objects to
 the withdrawal. When the Clerk grants a request to

     *    Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., Policy Regarding Clerk’s Au-
 thority to Grant Requests to Withdraw Petitions for Re-
 view (2022),
 https://www.mspb.gov/appeals/files/Policy_Regard-
 ing_Withdrawal_of_a_Petition_for_Review_1515773.pdf
 (last visited October 13, 2023).
Case: 23-2289    Document: 13      Page: 3     Filed: 11/06/2023

 BRADBERRY v. AIR FORCE                                      3

 withdraw, the order granting the request will be the final
 order of the Board for purposes of obtaining judicial review.
     Accordingly,
     IT IS ORDERED THAT:
     (1) The motion to dismiss is granted. The petition for
 review is dismissed.
     (2) All other pending motions are denied as moot.
     (3) Each side shall bear its own costs.
                                               FOR THE COURT

 November 6, 2023
      Date

 ISSUED AS A MANDATE: November 6, 2023