Reynolds v. Department of the Army

Federal Circuit

Reynolds v. Department of the Army

581 F. App'x 902

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

DecidedOctober 29, 2014

Docket2015-3013

StatusUnpublished

This text of 581 F. App'x 902 (Reynolds v. Department of the Army) 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

Reynolds v. Department of the Army, 581 F. App'x 902 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Upon review of this recently docketed petition for review, it appears that Raymond Reynolds’s petition was not timely filed.

It appears that on July 3, 2014, the Merit Systems Protection Board (Board) issued its Final Order, finding that the administrative judge correctly dismissed Reynolds’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The court received Reynolds’s petition for review on September 8, 2014, 67 days after the Board issued its final order.

The time for filing a petition for review from a Board decision or order is governed by 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1), which provides in relevant part that “[n]otwithstanding any *903 other provision of law, any petition for review 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). In order to be timely, a petition for review must be received by the court within the filing deadline. Pinat v. Office of Pers. Mgmt., 931 F.2d 1544, 1546 (Fed.Cir.1991) (petition is filed when received by this court); see also Fed. R.App. P. 25(a)(2)(A). This filing period is “statutory, mandatory, [and] jurisdictional.” Monzo v. Dep’t of Transp., 735 F.2d 1335, 1336 (Fed.Cir.1984).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) Reynolds is directed to show cause, within 30 days of the date of filing of this order, why this petition should not be dismissed as untimely. The Department of the Army may also respond within that time.

The briefing schedule is stayed.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Upon review of this recently docketed petition for review, it appears that Raymond Reynolds’s petition was not timely filed.

It appears that on July 3, 2014, the Merit Systems Protection Board (Board) issued its Final Order, finding that the administrative judge correctly dismissed Reynolds’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The court received Reynolds’s petition for review on September 8, 2014, 67 days after the Board issued its final order.

The time for filing a petition for review from a Board decision or order is governed by 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1), which provides in relevant part that “[n]otwithstanding any *903 other provision of law, any petition for review 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). In order to be timely, a petition for review must be received by the court within the filing deadline. Pinat v. Office of Pers. Mgmt., 931 F.2d 1544, 1546 (Fed.Cir.1991) (petition is filed when received by this court); see also Fed. R.App. P. 25(a)(2)(A). This filing period is “statutory, mandatory, [and] jurisdictional.” Monzo v. Dep’t of Transp., 735 F.2d 1335, 1336 (Fed.Cir.1984).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) Reynolds is directed to show cause, within 30 days of the date of filing of this order, why this petition should not be dismissed as untimely. The Department of the Army may also respond within that time.

The briefing schedule is stayed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

581 F. App'x 902, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reynolds-v-department-of-the-army-cafc-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack