05A30846
06-25-2003
Robert Smith, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Eastern Area), Agency.
Robert Smith v. United States Postal Service
05A30846
June 25, 2003
.
Robert Smith,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
(Eastern Area),
Agency.
Request No. 05A30846
Appeal No. 01A22999
Agency No. 1C-443-0042-01
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Robert Smith (complainant) timely initiated a request to the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the
decision in Robert Smith v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal
No. 01A22999 (May 8, 2003). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission
may, in its discretion, 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).
In his request for reconsideration, complainant reiterates arguments
previously raised on appeal. Complainant contends that a legitimate
investigation would have uncovered the outright lie made by the agency.
Along with his request, complainant enclosed copies of pictures
purportedly showing tool boxes that had been assigned to other Equipment
Mechanics and would show that he was denied his own tool cart. However,
there is nothing in the pictures that clearly identifies the tool boxes as
personal tool boxes nor does he explain why the pictures were unavailable
at the time of the appeal. We find that the documentation presented by
complainant does not demonstrate that an error was made by the previous
decision. Accordingly, the Commission finds that complaint failed to
demonstrate that the appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous
interpretation of material fact.
After a review of complainant's request for reconsideration, 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. The decision in EEOC
Appeal No. 01A22999 remains the Commission's final decision. There is no
further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission
on this request for reconsideration.
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
June 25, 2003
__________________
Date