Andrew Fullman v. Office of Personnel Management
Background
- Appellant Andrew Fullman, a former Postal Service employee terminated May 29, 2003, filed a FERS disability retirement application on or about March 7, 2011; OPM dismissed it as untimely because it was not filed within 1 year of separation and there was no evidence he was mentally incompetent during that year.
- Fullman sought reconsideration and submitted mental‑health records and sworn statements from family/friends asserting long‑term anxiety, depression, PTSD, and incapacity; OPM denied reconsideration on July 10, 2014 and Fullman appealed to the MSPB.
- The administrative judge provided multiple extensions, detailed guidance about the specific medical evidence required to show incompetence during May 29, 2003–May 28, 2004, and ultimately closed the record after a hearing and additional opportunities to supplement the record.
- The AJ found diagnoses of chronic mental conditions but concluded there was no medical evidence establishing that Fullman was mentally incompetent during the critical 1‑year filing period; testimonial statements were found not credible or insufficiently detailed.
- Fullman alleged bias, argued the AJ misweighed evidence, sought subpoenas for OPM personnel and additional post‑record medical records; the Board denied these contentions and affirmed the AJ’s decision, concluding Fullman failed to show incompetence during the filing year and that he had ample opportunity to submit evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Fullman’s Argument | OPM’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of FERS disability application | Fullman argued he was mentally incompetent during the 1‑year filing period, so the filing deadline should not bar his application | OPM argued application was filed long after 1‑year limit and no evidence shows incompetence during that year | Affirmed: application untimely; Fullman failed to show incompetence in the relevant year |
| Sufficiency/consideration of medical and testimonial evidence | Fullman contended AJ ignored/failed to weigh medical records and third‑party statements showing incapacity starting as early as 2001 | OPM argued records do not demonstrate incompetence during the filing year and AJ adequately considered the evidence | Affirmed: AJ considered the records, which did not prove incompetence in the critical period |
| Alleged bias and procedural errors by the AJ | Fullman alleged AJ was biased, gave confusing instructions, and improperly handled subpoenas | OPM argued AJ’s conduct was proper, instructions appropriate, and Fullman waived subpoena objections | Denied: no evidence of disqualifying bias; objections waived where not timely preserved |
| Requests to reopen/submit additional evidence on review | Fullman sought extensions and to file late supplements (psychiatric narrative, progress notes) | OPM argued record was closed after ample opportunity and late evidence was immaterial to the 2003–2004 period | Denied: Board found Fullman had sufficient opportunities and late evidence did not show mental state during the 1‑year window |
Key Cases Cited
- Oliver v. Department of Transportation, 1 M.S.P.R. 382 (presumption of honesty and integrity for administrative adjudicators)
- Bieber v. Department of the Army, 287 F.3d 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (bias standard requires deep‑seated favoritism or antagonism)
- Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (1994) (judicial‑bias standards)
- Galloway v. Department of Agriculture, 110 M.S.P.R. 311 (2008) (assessment of alleged administrative judge bias/comments)
- Bruce v. Office of Personnel Management, 119 M.S.P.R. 617 (2013) (disability retirement evidence standard re: incompetence timing)
- Licausi v. Office of Personnel Management, 350 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (Board’s de novo review of OPM decisions)
- King v. Office of Personnel Management, 112 M.S.P.R. 522 (2009) (agency failure to inform employee does not waive statutory filing deadline)
- Panter v. Department of the Air Force, 22 M.S.P.R. 281 (1984) (harmless‑error principle)
- Pinat v. Office of Personnel Management, 931 F.2d 1544 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (strictness of appellate filing deadlines)