Court Opinion

ID: 9958981
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-10 16:01:24.962641+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:22.058667
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                   MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

MICHAEL E. DUZENSKI,                            DOCKET NUMBER
              Appellant,                        CH-0752-22-0043-I-1

             v.

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS                          DATE: April 9, 2024
  AFFAIRS,
            Agency.

        THIS FINAL ORDER IS NONPRECEDENTIAL 1

      Colleen M. McLaughlin , Esquire, Wheaton, Illinois, for the appellant.

      Nicholas Peluso , Esquire, Westchester, Illinois, for the agency.

                                      BEFORE

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

                                  FINAL ORDER

      The appellant has filed a petition for review of the initial decision, which
dismissed his removal appeal as settled.      For the reasons set forth below, the
appellant’s petition for review is DISMISSED as untimely filed by 15 months
without good cause shown. 5 C.F.R. § 1201.114(e), (g).

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   A nonprecedential order is one that the Board has determined does not add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 Parties may cite nonprecedential orders,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

                                BACKGROUND
      The appellant filed an appeal challenging his removal from Federal service
in November 2021.     Initial Appeal File (IAF), Tab 1.    Shortly thereafter, the
agency filed a document entitled “Confidential Settlement Agreement and
Release,” which provided “full and final resolution and settlement before the
MSPB.” IAF, Tab 5 at 4-7. The administrative judge issued an initial decision
dismissing the appeal as settled and entered the agreement into the record for
enforcement purposes.    IAF, Tab 6, Initial Decision (ID) at 2-3.      The initial
decision became final on January 18, 2022, when neither party filed a petition for
review. ID at 3.
      On April 20, 2023, the appellant filed a petition for review and a motion to
waive the time limit for filing a petition for review. Petition for Review (PFR)
File, Tabs 2-3. In his petition for review, the appellant asked the Board to vacate
the settlement agreement, alleging that (1) it was invalid because it lacked
consideration and (2) the agency failed to notify the appellant of the proper
procedures for filing a mixed case appeal and/or misled him about mixed case
filing procedures.   PFR File, Tab 2 at 28-36.       He also alleged that, if the
agreement was valid, the agency was in breach. Id. at 20-27.
      In support of his motion to waive the time limit, the appellant’s counsel
filed a declaration asserting that the appellant retained her in June 2022 for a
separate matter and she learned in November 2022, after reviewing the
appellant’s files, that the settlement agreement resolving this Board appeal lacked
consideration. Id. at 38-39. She stated that, in November 2022, she requested
information and documentation related to the settlement agreement and conducted
research. Id. On December 5, 2022, counsel for the appellant emailed the agency
and alleged that it was in breach of the settlement agreement and that the
agreement was “illusory.” Id. at 40-41. In early December 2022, counsel for the
appellant became ill, which required her to work part-time until February 2023.
Id. at 39-40. During this time, she continued to conduct legal research related to
                                                                                     3

the settlement agreement and encountered difficulties in doing so. Id. at 39-43.
She also emailed the agency on several occasions between December 2022 and
March 2023 to discuss her concerns about the settlement agreement before filing
a petition for review on April 20, 2023. Id. The agency has not filed a response
to the appellant’s filing.

                 DISCUSSION OF ARGUMENTS ON REVIEW
      The Board’s regulations provide that a petition for review must be filed
within 35 days of the issuance of the initial decision or, if the appellant shows
that the initial decision was received more than 5 days after the date of issuance,
within 30 days after the date he received the initial decision.             5 C.F.R.
§ 1201.114(e). The Board will waive its filing deadline only upon a showing of
good cause for the delay in filing. 5 C.F.R. § 1201.114(g). To establish good
cause for an untimely filing, the appellant must show that he exercised due
diligence or ordinary prudence under the particular circumstances of the case.
See Gaetos v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 121 M.S.P.R. 201, ¶ 5 (2014). To
determine whether an appellant has shown good cause, the Board will consider
the length of the delay, the reasonableness of his excuse and showing of due
diligence, whether he is proceeding pro se, and whether he has presented evidence
of the existence of circumstances beyond his control that affected his ability to
comply with the time limits or of unavoidable casualty or misfortune that
similarly shows a causal relationship to his inability to timely file his petition for
review. See Moorman v. Department of the Army, 68 M.S.P.R. 60, 62-63 (1995),
aff’d, 79 F.3d 1167 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (Table).
      The appellant’s petition for review was filed 15 months after the initial
decision became final. ID at 3. Assuming, without deciding, that the appellant
obtained new and material evidence shedding light on the validity of the
settlement agreement in November 2022, we find that he did not act promptly by
filing his petition for review approximately 5 months later.          See Graves v.
                                                                                      4

Department of Veterans Affairs, 82 M.S.P.R. 38, ¶ 12 (1999) (finding that the
appellant failed to show good cause for his untimely petition for review because
he waited over 1 month after discovering the alleged new evidence of fraud in a
settlement agreement before filing a pleading with the Board). Although we are
sympathetic to the illness of the appellant’s counsel, we do not find that it
excuses the 5-month delay in filing the petition for review after she learned of the
settlement agreement’s purported invalidity in light of the fact that she performed
other work during the same time period. PFR File, Tab 2 at 38-41.
      We therefore dismiss the petition for review as untimely filed. This is the
final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board regarding the timeliness of
the petition for review. The initial decision remains the final decision of the
Board regarding the removal appeal.        We forward the appellant’s petition for
review to the Central Regional Office for adjudication as a petition for
enforcement. See 5 C.F.R. § 1201.182(a). Our findings as to the timeliness of
the instant petition for review do not speak to the timeliness of the appellant’s
petition for enforcement. See Davis v. Department of the Navy, 55 M.S.P.R. 109,
112 n.1 (1992).

                         NOTICE OF APPEAL RIGHTS 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

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 most appropriate in any matter.
                                                                                        5

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
Board neither endorses the services provided by any attorney nor warrants that
any attorney will accept representation in a given case.
                                                                                  6

      (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
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:
                                                                                      7

                            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. 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).

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, 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.
The All Circuit Review Act is retroactive to November 26, 2017. Pub. L. No. 115-195,
132 Stat. 1510.
                                                                                  8

      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.
      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:                        ______________________________
                                      Gina K. Grippando
                                      Clerk of the Board
Washington, D.C.