Court Opinion

ID: 9383878
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-31 15:01:02.284389+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:48.815166
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-2245    Document: 12     Page: 1    Filed: 03/27/2023

           NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                  ______________________

                  SENIA V. EDWARDS,
                       Petitioner

                             v.

      OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT,
                    Respondent
              ______________________

                        2022-2245
                  ______________________

    Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection
 Board in No. CH-844E-17-0332-I-1.
                 ______________________

   Before LOURIE, PROST, and WALLACH, Circuit Judges.
 PER CURIAM.
                         ORDER
     In response to this court’s November 28, 2022, order to
 show cause, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
 urges dismissal of this petition for review as untimely. Se-
 nia V. Edwards has not responded.
     OPM denied Ms. Edwards’ application for disability re-
 tirement benefits. Ms. Edwards appealed to the Merit Sys-
 tems Protection Board, which affirmed OPM’s denial in a
Case: 22-2245    Document: 12      Page: 2    Filed: 03/27/2023

 2                                            EDWARDS   v. OPM

 final decision dated May 16, 2022. 1 This court received Ms.
 Edwards’ petition on September 14, 2022. 2
      The timely filing of a petition from a Board decision is
 a jurisdictional requirement “and not subject to equitable
 tolling.” See Fedora v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 848 F.3d 1013,
 1015 (Fed. Cir. 2017). A petition from a final decision
 “shall be filed within 60 days after the Board issues notice
 of the final order or decision of the Board.” 5 U.S.C.
 § 7703(b)(1)(A). Here, Ms. Edwards’ petition was received
 outside of the 60-day filing deadline, including over 60 days
 after the Board’s July 8, 2022, letter with the courtesy copy
 of the decision. We therefore must dismiss.
     Accordingly,
     IT IS ORDERED THAT:
     (1) The petition for review is dismissed.

     1   On July 7, 2022, the Board was informed that its
 decision mailed to Ms. Edwards was returned undelivera-
 ble. In a letter dated July 8, 2022, the Board informed Ms.
 Edwards of its efforts to contact her and included a cour-
 tesy copy of the May 16, 2022, final decision.

     2   Although Ms. Edwards’ filings before this court in-
 dicated that she raised a discrimination claim at the Board,
 OPM responds without contradiction that Ms. Edwards did
 not raise a claim at the Board that OPM’s benefits decision
 was based on discrimination. See ECF No. 10-1 at 6–7.
Case: 22-2245       Document: 12   Page: 3    Filed: 03/27/2023

 EDWARDS   v. OPM                                           3

    (2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
                                    FOR THE COURT

 March 27, 2023                     /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner
     Date                           Peter R. Marksteiner
                                    Clerk of Court