Court Opinion

ID: 9405726
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-29 06:00:12.656338+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:24.207164
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
                        MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

     LUPE I. RODRIGUEZ,                              DOCKET NUMBER
                   Appellant,                        PH-0845-17-0402-I-1

                  v.

     OFFICE OF PERSONNEL                             DATE: June 28, 2023
       MANAGEMENT,
                   Agency.

                  THIS ORDER IS NONPRECEDENTIAL 

           Lupe I. Rodriguez, Stratford, Connecticut, pro se.

           Carla Robinson, Washington, D.C., for the agency.

                                           BEFORE

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

                                     REMAND ORDER

¶1         The appellant has filed a petition for review of the initial decision, which
     dismissed her appeal for lack of jurisdiction. For the reasons discussed below, we
     GRANT the appellant’s petition for review, VACATE the initial decision, and

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        A nonprecedential order is one that the Board has determined does not add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 Parties may cite nonprecedential orders,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

     REMAND the case to the New York Field Office for further adjudication in
     accordance with this Remand Order.
¶2         The appellant appealed a purported determination by the Office of
     Personnel Management (OPM) that she was not entitled to a waiver of an
     overpayment due to financial hardship. Initial Appeal File (IAF), Tab 1. The
     administrative judge ordered the appellant to file evidence and argument
     establishing jurisdiction and informed her that she should provide OPM’s final
     decision on the matter, if she had it. IAF, Tab 3. The appellant failed to provide
     such a final decision, and OPM asserted that it was unable to locate any records
     concerning the appellant.     IAF, Tabs 5-7.      Because the appellant failed to
     establish that OPM had issued a final decision, the administrative judge dismissed
     the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. IAF, Tab 8, Initial Decision.
¶3         On review, the appellant asserts that she is entitled to a waiver because of
     medical and financial hardship.     Petition for Review (PFR) File, Tab 1.    She
     attaches proof of various communications she had with OPM and evidence
     pertaining to her medical conditions. Id. In its response, OPM asserts that it has
     located the appellant’s retirement file and determined that it issued her a final
     decision. PFR File, Tab 5. OPM states that it would not object to the Board
     vacating the initial decision and remanding the appeal for a decision on the
     merits. Id. OPM has not submitted its final decision into the record; however,
     based on OPM’s representations, we find it appropriate to vacate the initial
     decision and remand the case for further adjudication. We make no findings at
     this time on the merits of the appellant’s arguments.
                                                                                  3

                                         ORDER
¶4        For the reasons discussed above, we remand this case to the New York Field
     Office for further adjudication in accordance with this Remand Orde r.

     FOR THE BOARD:                           /s/ for
                                              Jennifer Everling
                                              Acting Clerk of the Board
     Washington, D.C.