Louis J. Rios v. Department of Homeland Security
Background
- Appellant (Customs and Border Protection Officer) appealed his removal to the MSPB.
- Appellant submitted a pleading withdrawing the appeal and attached a fully executed settlement agreement.
- The administrative judge dismissed the appeal as "settled," entered the settlement agreement into the record, and stated the Board would retain jurisdiction to enforce it.
- On petition for review, both appellant and agency said they did not intend the agreement to be entered for Board enforcement and asked that the appeal be treated as withdrawn.
- The settlement agreement and accompanying pleading were silent about Board-enforceability; the record did not show the parties agreed the Board should retain enforcement jurisdiction.
- The Board vacated the initial decision (dismissal as settled), dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, denied the parties’ request to strike the filed settlement agreement from the record, and advised of appeal rights to the Federal Circuit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the AJ properly entered the settlement agreement into the record for Board enforcement | Appellant: parties did not intend Board enforcement; agreement should not be entered for enforcement | Agency: agrees parties did not intend Board enforcement; the agreement should not be entered for enforcement | AJ erred; record lacks evidence parties agreed Board enforcement was intended, so agreement should not have been entered for enforcement |
| Whether the appeal should be dismissed as settled or withdrawn | Appellant: requests dismissal as withdrawn; submitted pleading sought withdrawal | Agency: joins appellant; agrees dismissal as withdrawn is proper | Appeal dismissed as withdrawn rather than as settled |
| Whether the Board retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement | Appellant: does not seek Board enforcement | Agency: does not seek Board enforcement | Board does not retain jurisdiction because parties did not agree to Board-enforceability and agreement was not properly entered for that purpose |
| Whether the settlement agreement copy should be stricken from the record | Appellant: asks to withdraw the pleading with attachment and replace with a withdrawal-only pleading | Agency: joins motion to strike | Denied—regulations do not provide for striking a properly filed pleading; no basis shown to remove it (but Board noted FOIA/Privacy Act considerations for future disclosure requests) |
Key Cases Cited
- Mahoney v. U.S. Postal Service, 37 M.S.P.R. 146 (1988) (Board must document settlement terms, parties’ understanding, and whether agreement is enforceable by the Board)
- Wood v. U.S. Postal Service, 76 M.S.P.R. 420 (1997) (administrative judge erred entering settlement into record for enforcement when record does not show parties intended Board enforcement)
- Richardson v. Environmental Protection Agency, 5 M.S.P.R. 248 (1981) (settlement must be made part of record before Board will enforce it)
- Lincoln v. U.S. Postal Service, 113 M.S.P.R. 486 (2010) (voluntary withdrawal of an appeal must be clear, decisive, and unequivocal)