0320100008
12-04-2009
Yuri J. Stoyanov, Petitioner, v. Ray Mabus, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.
Yuri J. Stoyanov,
Petitioner,
v.
Ray Mabus,
Secretary,
Department of the Navy,
Agency.
Petition No. 0320100008
MSPB No. DC1221090445W1
DENIAL OF CONSIDERATION
Petitioner filed a petition with the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission asking for review of a Final Order issued by the Merit
Systems Protection Board (MSPB) concerning his claim of reprisal for
whistleblowing in violation of the Whistleblowers' Protection Act.
Petitioner filed an individual right of action, alleging that he
was retaliated against because he made protected disclosures as a
whistleblower. As noted by the MSPB Administrative Judge, petitioner
listed "a myriad of personnel actions, including among other things,
a 14-day suspension, a failure to promote and changes of duties." The AJ
further noted that "many of his whistleblowing activities appear related
to his old claims that [the agency] committed national origin and age
discrimination against him." The AJ found that the instant matters
were "in many ways [] essentially nothing more than another attempt
to repackage his prior rejected claims of whistleblower reprisal."
The AJ found that none of petitioner's allegations came close to alleging
facts sufficient to make a nonfrivolous claim of gross mismanagement or
abuse of authority. The AJ noted that most of petitioner's allegations
were "generalized, repetitive allegations" that were too vague to be
comprehensible, even when he identified specific statutes violated.
Accordingly, the AJ dismissed petitioner's appeal. Petitioner sought
review by the full Board, which denied his petition. Petitioner then
filed the instant petition with the Commission, without comment.
EEOC regulations provide that the Commission has jurisdiction over
allegations of discrimination raised in connection with an action
appealable to the MSPB. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.302. Here, the MSPB dismissed
the appeal finding petitioner failed to make nonfrivoulous allegations
that he had made any disclosures protected by the Whistleblowers'
Protection Act. The Commission has no jurisdiction over procedural
matters of the Board. Because the MSPB did not address any matters
within the Commission's jurisdiction, the Commission has no jurisdiction
to review petitioner's case. Consequently, the Commission denies the
instant petition for review.1
PETITIONER'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (W0408)
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,
based on the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board, within
thirty (30) calendar days of 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 (Z1008)
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
December 4, 2009
__________________
Date
1 Petitioner submitted his petition on a form wherein he listed Agency
EEO complaint number DON-09-00167-01370-017. However, there is no
indication that this EEO complaint was ever part of his appeal before
the MSPB. It appears that the agency should process this complaint,
if it has not already done so, pursuant to the EEO complaint processing
regulations at 29 C.F.R. Part 1614.
??
??
??
??
2
0320100008
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
3
0320100008