Sharon E. Knight v. Office of Personnel Management
Background
- Appellant Sharon E. Knight sought reconsideration of an OPM decision finding an $11,040.80 overpayment of her FERS annuity; OPM denied waiver and set up monthly collections.
- Knight appealed to the MSPB contesting OPM’s February 26, 2016 reconsideration decision.
- OPM moved to dismiss the MSPB appeal, stating it had rescinded the February 26, 2016 reconsideration decision and would issue a new final decision.
- The administrative judge dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction based on OPM’s representation that it had rescinded the reconsideration decision.
- Knight contested on review, asserting OPM nevertheless withheld $150 from her June 1, 2016 annuity payment; OPM admitted the withholding was erroneous, refunded the $150, and provided evidence of the refund.
- The Board found OPM had fully rescinded the reconsideration decision and restored the status quo ante, divesting the Board of jurisdiction; the appeal was dismissed without prejudice to refiling if OPM issues a new reconsideration decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the MSPB has jurisdiction after OPM rescinds a reconsideration decision | Knight argued OPM’s later collection showed rescission was not effective and the Board retains jurisdiction | OPM argued it rescinded the reconsideration decision and restored the appellant to the status quo ante (any withholding was an error later refunded) | MSPB lacks jurisdiction because OPM fully rescinded and restored the status quo ante; appeal dismissed without prejudice |
| Whether an erroneous, later-refunded withholding defeats rescission | Knight asserted collection showed rescission did not occur | OPM produced evidence of refund and explanation of erroneous withholding | Erroneous withholding that was refunded does not prevent rescission if the status quo ante is restored |
| Whether merits arguments or reprisal claims affect jurisdictional dismissal | Knight raised merits and reprisal concerns on review | OPM maintained jurisdictional issue is dispositive | Merits and reprisal arguments are irrelevant to the jurisdictional question and do not disturb dismissal |
| Whether appellant may refile if OPM issues a new decision | Knight concerned about future collection | OPM indicated it may issue a new reconsideration decision | Appeal dismissed without prejudice; appellant may file a new timely appeal if OPM issues a new decision |
Key Cases Cited
- Martin v. Office of Personnel Management, 119 M.S.P.R. 188 (Board 2013) (rescission divests Board jurisdiction unless status quo ante not restored)
- Rorick v. Office of Personnel Management, 109 M.S.P.R. 597 (Board 2008) (rescission of reconsideration decision removes Board jurisdiction)
- Sapla v. Department of the Navy, 118 M.S.P.R. 551 (Board 2012) (merits arguments do not affect jurisdictional determinations)
- Pinat v. Office of Personnel Management, 931 F.2d 1544 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (Federal Circuit will not normally waive statutory deadline for filing a petition for review)