05a50481
03-30-2005
Doyle Edward Sorrell, Jr., Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Great Lakes Area) Agency.
Doyle Edward Sorrell, Jr. v. United States Postal Service
05A50481
March 30, 2005
.
Doyle Edward Sorrell, Jr.,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
(Great Lakes Area)
Agency.
Request No. 05A50481
Appeal No. 01A45910
Agency No. 1J-484-0013-04
DENIAL
Doyle Edward Sorrell, Jr. (complainant) timely requested reconsideration
of the decision in Doyle Edward Sorrell, Jr. v. United States Postal
Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01A45910 (December 22, 2004). 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) (2004).
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 our decision of to deny the request.
In our prior decision, we found that complainant failed to state an
actionable claim. His complaint alleged that the agency breached a
grievance settlement. As noted in that prior decision, �complainant
may not use the EEO process to obtain compliance with a grievance
settlement.� Doyle Edward Sorrell, Jr. v. United States Postal Serv.,
EEOC Appeal No. 01A45910 (Dec. 22, 2004) (citing Ouezada v. United States
Postal Serv., EEOC Request No. 05930175 (Aug. 12, 1993)).
We remind complainant that a �request for reconsideration is not a second
appeal to the Commission.� Equal Employment Opportunity Management
Directive for 29 C.F. R. Part 1614, at 9-17 (rev. Nov. 9, 1999). At the
time we rendered the initial decision in question, we carefully considered
all of the record evidence. Complainant has offered no persuasive reason
why this decision should be reconsidered now. As such, the decision
in EEOC Appeal No. 01A45910 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:
March 30, 2005
______________________________ __________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director Date
Office of Federal Operations