Summary
In Krugman v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs, 645 Fed.Appx. 1000, –––– (Fed. Cir.2016), a whistleblower case, this court was afforded a rare view of how the VA selects examiners and the grounds it relies on to establish competency.
Summary of this case from Mathis v. McDonaldOpinion
2015-3156
04-12-2016
RICHARD S. KRUGMAN, Petitioner v. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent
ARI MICHA WILKENFELD, The Wilkenfeld Law Group, Washington, DC, argued for petitioner. Also represented by ROSALIND HERENDEEN. VERONICA NICOLE ONYEMA, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for respondent. Also represented by BENJAMIN C. MIZER, ROBERT E. KIRSCHMAN, JR., ALLISON KIDD-MILLER.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in No. DA-1221-13-0288-B-1.
JUDGMENT
ARI MICHA WILKENFELD, The Wilkenfeld Law Group, Washington, DC, argued for petitioner. Also represented by ROSALIND HERENDEEN. VERONICA NICOLE ONYEMA, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for respondent. Also represented by BENJAMIN C. MIZER, ROBERT E. KIRSCHMAN, JR., ALLISON KIDD-MILLER. THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:
PER CURIAM (REYNA, CHEN, and STOLL, Circuit Judges).
AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.
ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT April 12, 2016
Date
/s/ Daniel E. O'Toole
Daniel E. O'Toole
Clerk of Court