John D. Sotherden, Complainant,v.Anthony J. Principi, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 23, 2004
05A30465_r (E.E.O.C. Sep. 23, 2004)

05A30465_r

09-23-2004

John D. Sotherden, Complainant, v. Anthony J. Principi, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.


John D. Sotherden v. Department of Veterans Affairs

05A30465

September 23, 2004

.

John D. Sotherden,

Complainant,

v.

Anthony J. Principi,

Secretary,

Department of Veterans Affairs,

Agency.

Request No. 05A30465

Appeal No. 01A23428

Agency No. 200H-0670-2002100525

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

On February 13, 2003, Department of Veterans Affairs (agency) timely

initiated a request to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the

Commission or EEOC) to reconsider the decision in John D. Sotherden

v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 01A23428 (January

9, 2003). EEOC regulations provide that the Commissioners may,

in their discretion, reconsider any previous Commission decision.

29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b). The party requesting reconsideration must

submit written argument or evidence which tends to establish one or more

of the following two criteria: the appellate decision involved a clearly

erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or the decision will

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

the agency. Id. For the reasons set forth herein, the agency's request

is granted.

Complainant filed his formal EEO complaint alleging discrimination on

the basis of sex when he was subjected to a hostile work environment.

The agency dismissed the complaint, finding that complainant failed

to file it in a timely manner. The agency indicated that complainant

received the Notice of Right to File a formal complaint (Notice) on

December 18, 2001. The agency noted that complainant filed his formal

complaint on January 8, 2002. The agency concluded that complainant

untimely filed his formal complaint.

The previous decision found that complainant was represented by an

attorney during the time in which the Notice was issued, as evidenced

by the EEO Counselor's report listing an attorney representative.

The previous decision noted that pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.605(d),

when a complainant is represented by an attorney, �time frames for receipt

of materials shall be computed from the time of receipt by the attorney.�

The previous decision found that the agency failed to support its decision

with evidence as to when complainant's attorney received the Notice.

Accordingly, the previous decision reversed the agency's dismissal.

On request for reconsideration, the agency claims that complainant

was not represented by an attorney at the time the Notice was issued

and argues that it properly served the Notice solely on complainant.

The agency notes that complainant received the Notice on December 18,

2001, and states that his January 8, 2002 formal complaint was untimely

filed.<1> In support of its position, the agency notes that the EEO

Counselor's report, containing the name of an attorney representative is

dated February 28, 2002, and was written after (emphasis in original)

the mailing of the Notice on December 13, 2001, and after the agency

received complainant's formal complaint on January 28, 2002. The agency

also cites the November 5, 2001 Notice of Rights and Responsibilities

provided to complaint, in which complainant checked off the box that

he does not want a representative at this time. The agency notes that

complainant signed this document on December 11, 2001, two days before the

agency mailed complainant the Notice of Right to File a formal complaint.

The agency claims that the earliest it could be considered on notice that

complainant might by represented by counsel was when it received his

formal complaint. Complainant does not claim that he was represented

by an attorney prior to filing the complaint.

Upon review of the record, we conclude that the previous decision was

clearly erroneous. The previous decision erred in finding that complainant

was represented by an attorney during the time in which the Notice of

Right to File was issued. Since complainant was not represented by

an attorney, the fifteen-day period for complainant to file his formal

complaint began to run on December 18, 2001, when he received the Notice.

Therefore, for the complaint to have been timely filed, complainant would

have had to file it by January 2, 2002. See 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.106(b),

1614.604(d). The record reveals that complainant did not file his

complaint until January 8, 2002, which was beyond the applicable

limitations period. Accordingly, the Commission affirms the agency's

dismissal of the complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(2).

CONCLUSION

After a review of the agency's request for reconsideration, the

previous decision, and the entire record, the Commission finds that

the agency's request meets the criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b),

and it is the decision of the Commission to grant the agency's request.

The decision of the Commission in Appeal No. 01A23428 is reversed.

The agency's decision dismissing complainant's complaint is affirmed.

There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of

the Commission on a Request to Reconsider.

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0900)

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. If you

file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil

action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

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:

______________________________

Stephen Llewellyn

Acting Executive Officer

Executive Secretariat

September 23, 2004

__________________

Date

1In its decision the agency states that

complainant's formal complaint was filed January 8, 2002. In its request

for reconsideration, the agency states that complainant's formal complaint

was filed February 1, 2002. The record reveals that complainant mailed

his complaint to the agency's headquarters in Washington, D.C. in an

envelope postmarked January 8, 2002. Thereafter headquarters faxed

the formal complaint to the agency's local office on February 1, 2002.

The Commission considers the formal complaint filed on January 8, 2002.