Lledo v. Office of Pers. Mgmt.

886 F.3d 1211
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
DecidedMarch 28, 2018
Docket2017-1717
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 886 F.3d 1211 (Lledo v. Office of Pers. Mgmt.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lledo v. Office of Pers. Mgmt., 886 F.3d 1211 (Fed. Cir. 2018).

Opinion

Newman, Circuit Judge.

Tito C. Lledo appeals the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board ("Board") that affirmed the Office of Personnel Management's ("OPM") reconsideration decision, denying his application for deferred retirement and his request to make a deposit in the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund ("CSRDF"). Lledo v. Office of Pers. Mgmt ., MSPB Docket No. SF-0831-16-0799-I-1, 2016 WL 7667554 (Jan. 6, 2017) ("Board Op."). The Board's decision is in accordance with law, and is affirmed.

BACKGROUND

From 1968 to 1991, Mr. Lledo was employed by the United States at the U.S. Navy Public Works Center in Subic Bay, Philippines. His initial position was as an "Apprentice (electrician)"-a position designated as "excepted service-indefinite appointment." Mr. Lledo resigned with the designated severance pay on November 13, 1991. During his 23 years as a Navy employee, Mr. Lledo worked in various positions, culminating in a final position as a Telephone Installation and Repair Foreman I.

On March 31, 2014, Mr. Lledo filed an application for deferred retirement benefits under the Civil Service Retirement System ("CSRS"), and requested to make a post-employment deposit into the CSRDF. The OPM denied the application and deposit request. Mr. Lledo appealed to the Board, arguing that he was entitled to CSRS benefits under 5 C.F.R. § 831.303 (a) and "based upon [his] non-deduction service ending involuntarily [on] September 30, 1982." Resp't's App. 20 (explanation at section 25 of OPM form); see also Board Op. at 4-5.

The Board's administrative judge affirmed OPM's denial, stating that "all of [Mr. Lledo's] appointments with the Navy, *1213 including his final position, were either not-to-exceed ("NTE") appointments or indefinite appointments in the excepted service." Board Op. at 2. The administrative judge affirmed the OPM decision, stating that "[w]hile [Mr. Lledo] has shown that he had sufficient creditable federal service, he has failed to show that any of that service was performed in a position covered under the [Civil Service Retirement Act]." Board Op. at 6. This initial decision became the Board's final decision, and Mr. Lledo appeals.

DISCUSSION

We review a decision of the Board to determine whether it is "(1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) obtained without procedures required by law, rule, or regulation having been followed; or (3) unsupported by substantial evidence." 5 U.S.C. § 7703 (c) ; Whitmore v. Dep't of Labor , 680 F.3d 1353 , 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2012). Substantial evidence is "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Simpson v. Office of Pers. Mgmt ., 347 F.3d 1361 , 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (quoting Consol. Edison Co. of N.Y. v. NLRB , 305 U.S. 197 , 229, 59 S.Ct. 206 , 83 L.Ed. 126 (1938) ).

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8333 (a) - (b), to qualify for a CSRS retirement annuity, an employee must have performed at least five years of creditable civilian service, and must have served at least one of his last two years of federal service in a covered position-i.e., service that is subject to the Civil Service Retirement Act. Quiocson v. Office of Pers. Mgmt. , 490 F.3d 1358 , 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2007) ; Casilang v. Office of Pers. Mgmt ., 248 F.3d 1381 , 1382 (Fed. Cir. 2001). While nearly all federal service is creditable service, covered service is a narrower subset of federal service. Rosete v. Office of Pers. Mgmt. , 48 F.3d 514 , 516 (Fed. Cir. 1995) ; see also Aquino v. Office of Pers. Mgmt. , 451 Fed.Appx. 941 , 942 (Fed. Cir. 2011). Temporary, intermittent, term, and excepted indefinite appointments are not covered positions. 5 C.F.R. § 831.201 (a) ; Quiocson , 490 F.3d at 1360 .

The Board found that Mr. Lledo's employment was creditable civilian service. Board Op. at 6. However, the Board also found that Mr. Lledo did not ever serve in a covered position, citing the requirement for covered service in one of his last two years of federal service, that is, during the period between November 13, 1989 and November 13, 1991. See id . at 4. The Board specifically observed that "all of [Mr. Lledo's] appointments with the Navy, including his final position, were either not-to-exceed ('NTE') appointments or indefinite appointments in the excepted service." Id . at 2; see also id .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Caneda v. Opm
Federal Circuit, 2026
Lynda Resumadero v. Office of Personnel Management
Merit Systems Protection Board, 2024
Bagat v. Opm
Federal Circuit, 2024
Apiag v. Opm
Federal Circuit, 2023
Gregorio Bagat v. Office of Personnel Management
Merit Systems Protection Board, 2023
Ricardo Castillejos v. Office of Personnel Management
Merit Systems Protection Board, 2022
Murray Johnson v. Office of Personnel Management
2022 MSPB 19 (Merit Systems Protection Board, 2022)
Eclarin v. Opm
Federal Circuit, 2019
Labio v. Opm
Federal Circuit, 2018
Reboja v. Opm
Federal Circuit, 2018
Villaruel v. Opm
Federal Circuit, 2018
Cristobal v. Opm
Federal Circuit, 2018

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
886 F.3d 1211, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lledo-v-office-of-pers-mgmt-cafc-2018.