05A20364
04-23-2002
Miguel A. Valverde, Complainant, v. Paul H. O'Neill, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.
Miguel A. Valverde v. Department of the Treasury
05A20364
April 23, 2002
.
Miguel A. Valverde,
Complainant,
v.
Paul H. O'Neill,
Secretary,
Department of the Treasury,
Agency.
Request No. 05A20364
Appeal No. 01A15124
Agency No. 001048
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Miguel A. Valverde (complainant) initiated a request to the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider
the decision in Miguel A. Valverde v. Department of the Treasury, EEOC
Appeal No. 01A15124 (December 14, 2001). 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).
After a review of the 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).
Complainant alleged that he was discriminated against on the bases of
national origin (Hispanic) and age (55 at the relevant time) when he
was not selected for the position of Journeyman Plate Maker (Intaglio).
The previous decision affirmed the agency's finding that complainant
failed to establish discrimination. Although complainant established
a prima facie case of discrimination, he failed to establish that the
agency's explanation for its selection was a pretext for discrimination.
Specifically, the selecting official (SO) testified that all three
applicants, including complainant, were qualified, but that the other
two applicants had more recent relevant experience. SO noted that
complainant had not worked as a Journeyman Plate Maker (Intaglio) for
some time, while the other applicants were currently working in the field
and keeping up-to-date on the latest technology. The previous decision
concluded that complainant failed to establish by a preponderance of
the evidence that he was subjected to discrimination.
In his request for reconsideration, complainant notes that he does not
have an attorney and requests the Commission's assistance in obtaining
an attorney. He also argues that he believes the agency ignored his
experience and selected someone less qualified than he. He does not,
however, demonstrate that the previous decision involved a clearly
erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, nor does he argue
that it will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices,
or operations of the agency. Accordingly, it is the decision of the
Commission to deny the request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 01A15124
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
April 23, 2002
Date