Nancy A. Armery, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 15, 2005
05a51080 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 15, 2005)

05a51080

09-15-2005

Nancy A. Armery, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Nancy A. Armery v. United States Postal Service

05A51080

September 15, 2005

.

Nancy A. Armery,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Request No. 05A51080

Appeal No. 01A41813

Agency No. 4B-018-0021-03

Hearing No. 160-2003-08542X

DENIAL

Nancy A. Armery (complainant) timely requested reconsideration of

the decision in Nancy A. Armery v. United States Postal Service, EEOC

Appeal No. 01A41813 (June 15, 2005). EEOC Regulations provide that

the Commission may, in its discretion, grant a request to reconsider any

previous Commission decision where the requesting party demonstrates that:

(1) the appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation

of material fact or law; or (2) the appellate decision will have a

substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the

agency. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b).

After reconsidering the previous decision and the entire record, the

Commission finds that the request fails to meet the criteria of 29

C.F.R. � 1614.405(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to deny

the request. In her request, complainant argues that the AJ erred in

issuing summary judgment because there were material facts in dispute. To

support her argument she contends that the record was not fully developed

and that several statements of proposed witnesses and other documentary

evidence should now be accepted.

The Commission finds that this evidence should have been presented to

the AJ for consideration along with complainant's opposition to the

agency's motion for summary judgment. There was no argument during that

time that the record was incomplete and no attempt to submit affidavits

of witnesses to support her argument that there were genuine issues

in dispute. Complainant's belated attempt to raised these arguments

for the first time in this request is inappropriate and must be rejected.

Moreover, none of the arguments or evidence complainant has proffered

establishes that the previous decision was based on an erroneous

interpretation of fact or law. That is, our decision remains essentially

unchallenged, that even assuming complainant was disabled as defined by

the law, she failed to establish that the agency's actions were a pretext

for discrimination. Therefore, the decision in EEOC Appeal No. 01A41813

remains the Commission's final decision. There is no further right of

administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request.

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0900)

This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right

of administrative appeal from the Commission's decision. You have the

right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District

Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive this

decision. If you file a civil action, you must name as the defendant in

the complaint the person who is the official agency head or department

head, identifying that person by his or her full name and official title.

Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your case in court.

"Agency" or "department" means the national organization, and not the

local office, facility or department in which you work.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1199)

If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot

afford the services of an attorney, you may request that the Court appoint

an attorney to represent you and that the Court permit you to file the

action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.;

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c).

The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of

the Court. Filing a request for an attorney does not extend your time

in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action

must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above

("Right to File A Civil Action").

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

September 15, 2005

__________________

Date