Nelson v. Office of Personnel Management

559 F. App'x 1032
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
DecidedMarch 27, 2014
Docket2014-3054
StatusUnpublished

This text of 559 F. App'x 1032 (Nelson v. Office of Personnel Management) 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
Nelson v. Office of Personnel Management, 559 F. App'x 1032 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

Opinion

ORDER

ON MOTION

PER CURIAM.

The Office of Personnel Management moves to waive the requirements of Federal Circuit Rule 27(f) and to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Sidney Nelson, Jr. did not respond.

This court’s review of Merit Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”) decisions is limited to final orders or final decisions. See Weed v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 571 F.3d 1359, 1361-63 (Fed.Cir.2009); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(9). Here, Mr. Nelson filed a timely petition for review with the MSPB, which remains pending and which rendered the initial decision non-final for purposes of our review. 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 ... ”). Because there is no final order or final decision of the MSPB, this court currently lacks jurisdiction over this case.

That conclusion is not altered by the fact that Mr. Nelson filed a petition for review at this court before filing his petition at the MSPB. The usual rule that the filing of a timely request for reconsideration tolls finality, see Stone v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv., 514 U.S. 386, 392-93, 115 S.Ct. 1537, 131 L.Ed.2d 465 (1995), applies even where, as here, the request is made subsequent to the filing of the petition for judicial review. See Wade v. Fed. Commc’ns Comm’n, 986 F.2d 1433, 1434 (D.C.Cir.1993) (holding that the appellant’s “request for agency reconsideration rendered the underlying action nonfinal, regardless of the order of filing”).

This order does not prevent Mr. Nelson from seeking this court’s review by filing a timely petition for review after the MSPB enters a final decision.

Accordingly, It Is Ordered That:

(1) The motion is granted. The petition is dismissed.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

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

Related

Stone v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
514 U.S. 386 (Supreme Court, 1995)
Weed v. Social Security Administration
571 F.3d 1359 (Federal Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
559 F. App'x 1032, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nelson-v-office-of-personnel-management-cafc-2014.