Joaquin Liborio, Complainant,v.Robert M. Gates, Secretary, Department of Defense (Defense Contract Audit Agency), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJan 14, 2011
0520110091 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 14, 2011)

0520110091

01-14-2011

Joaquin Liborio, Complainant, v. Robert M. Gates, Secretary, Department of Defense (Defense Contract Audit Agency), Agency.


Joaquin Liborio,

Complainant,

v.

Robert M. Gates,

Secretary,

Department of Defense

(Defense Contract Audit Agency),

Agency.

Request No. 0520110091

Appeal No. 0120102277

Agency No. E0801

DENIAL

Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in

Joaquin Liborio v. Department of Defense, EEOC Appeal No. 0120102277

(Sept. 30, 2010). 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).

BACKGROUND

In the underlying case, Complainant alleged he was discriminated

against on the bases of national origin (Hispanic), and sex (male)

when he became aware on November 29-30, 2007, that he was not selected

for the position of Auditor (Technical Specialist), GS-0511-13, under

Job Opportunity Announcements (JOAs) EA-2008-0001 and EA-2008-0002.

At the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency provided Complainant

with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of her right to

request a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ).

On July 21, 2008, Complainant requested a hearing before an AJ.

On September 29, 2008, the AJ assigned to the case issued a Hearing and

Pre-Hearing Scheduling Order, requiring the parties to submit pre-hearing

reports no later than January 11, 2010 (EEOC Case No. 410-2008-00358X).

On January 25, 2010, the AJ dismissed Complainant's request for a hearing

because Complaint, through his attorney, failed to comply with the AJ's

order and did not submit a pre-hearing report. On February 1, 2010,

Complainant filed a Request for Reconsideration of the Order dismissing

his request for a hearing. The AJ denied the Request for Reconsideration

on February 12, 2010, and remanded the case to the Agency to issue

a Final Agency Decision (FAD) pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.110(b).

In its FAD the Agency concluded that Complainant failed to prove that

the he was subject to discrimination as alleged.

Specifically, the Agency found that Complainant failed to present

evidence to establish that the selecting official was motivated by

discriminatory animus. The Agency determined that Complainant's low

Auditor Promotion Appraisal (APA) score, in comparison to any of the

referred candidates, was in fact the reason for his non-selection for

the position. The Agency determined that the selecting official did

not err when he used this score to serve as one of the primary basis

on which selection was made. We issued an appellate decision affirming

the Agency's findings in its FAD.

ARGUMENTS ON RECONSIDERATION

In his request for reconsideration, Complainant states that he was in fact

subject to discrimination by the Agency. He is asking that the Commission

reconsider its decision because his attorney did not represent him well

by failing to thoroughly present his case throughout the administrative

process and on appeal.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Complainant is reminded 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 (EEO MD-110), Ch. 9

� VII.A. (Nov. 9, 1999). Because Complainant has not put forth any

arguments or contentions that were not previously considered in rendering

the underlying decision, the Commission finds that Complainant has not

demonstrated that the underlying decision involved a clearly erroneous

interpretation of material fact or law. Neither has Complainant argued

or demonstrated that the underlying decision would have a substantial

impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency.

CONCLUSION

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. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120102277 remains the

Commission's 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 (P0610)

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 (Z0610)

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 from the Court that

the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also

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 with

the Court 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

____1/14/11______________

Date

2

0520110091

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

2

0520110091