Anthony Caros v. Department of Homeland Security
Background
- Appellant Anthony Caros was the subject of a Board order (Feb 25, 2014) directing the Department of Homeland Security to cancel his removal and pay correct back pay, interest, and benefits.
- Caros filed a petition for enforcement on Dec. 8, 2014; an administrative judge denied enforcement in an initial decision (Oct. 5, 2015).
- On review (Apr. 18, 2016) the Board found the agency not in full compliance because it had not shown its overtime and premium-pay calculations for the back-pay period were reasonable, and referred the matter to the Office of General Counsel.
- The agency submitted a recalculation on June 17, 2016 showing additional overtime/premium pay owed but initially did not provide proof of payment; Caros contested the recalculation period in a later pleading.
- On Oct. 6, 2016 the agency produced evidence that it paid the recalculated overtime and premium pay plus interest; the Board concluded the agency is now in full compliance and dismissed the enforcement petition.
- The Board noted an administrative-judge error in failing to advise Caros of mixed-case appeal rights but found it non-reversible because the Board provided the notice in the Final Order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether agency complied with the Feb. 25, 2014 back-pay order as to overtime and premium-pay calculations | Caros contended the agency failed to calculate/pay correct overtime for the back-pay period (and later raised a timing misreading) | Agency said it recalculated using similarly situated employees and owed additional funds; later produced proof of payment | Agency is in full compliance after producing payment evidence; enforcement petition dismissed |
| Whether agency provided proof that recalculated amounts were paid | Caros argued payments/calculations were incorrect or incomplete | Agency initially submitted recalculation (no proof of payment), later submitted proof of payment with interest | Proof of payment (Oct. 6, 2016) established compliance |
| Whether the administrative judge’s failure to inform Caros of mixed-case appeal rights required reversal | Caros lacked notice of mixed-case appeal rights from the compliance initial decision | Agency did not dispute Board’s corrective notice; Board can provide required notice in final order | Error acknowledged but not reversible; Board’s Final Order provided required mixed-case appeal notice |
| Entitlement to attorney fees and costs and filing deadline | Caros may be entitled to fees/costs under 5 U.S.C. provisions | Agency did not contest entitlement in this order; procedural requirements apply | Appellant notified of potential entitlement and instructed to file a motion within 60 days if eligible |
Key Cases Cited
- Grimes v. U.S. Postal Service, 39 M.S.P.R. 183 (1988) (administrative-judge failure to advise of mixed-case appeal rights may be nonreversible if corrected in final Board order)