History
  • No items yet
midpage
Thomas H. Davidson, Jr. v. United States Postal Service
24 F.3d 223
Fed. Cir.
1994
Check Treatment

ORDER

NIES, Circuit Judges.

Thomas H. Davidson, Jr., appeals the affirmance of his removal from the United States Postal Service for unsatisfactory attendance and failure to adhere to the required work schedule. Before the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), Mr. Davidson asserted a claim of discrimination. In Williams v. Department of the Army, 715 F.2d 1485 (Fed.Cir.1983), this court held that it had no jurisdiction over the merits of a mixed case, i.e., one involving an adverse *224 action and a claim of discrimination. However, a case which was presented to the MSPB as a mixed case will be heard by this court if the petitioner files an explicit waiver of the claim of discrimination. The government argues that simply by appealing to this court, Mr. Davidson has waived his discrimination claim. We disagree. As held in Daniels v. United States Postal Service, 726 F.2d 723, 724 (Fed.Cir.1984), a waiver of a claim of discrimination must be by an express written statement.

Mr. Davidson filed no statement that he waived his claim of discrimination on the merits. Inappropriately, the waiver he filed indicates he seeks review of the MSPB’s dismissal of his case for lack of jurisdiction or untimeliness, issues not involved at this stage of the proceedings.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

Petitioner file with the court within 15 days of the date hereof either (1) a request for this court to proceed which must be accompanied by the appropriate waiver, or (2) a request for transfer to a particular United States district court.

In the absence of a timely response, the appeal is subject to dismissal for lack of prosecution.

Case Details

Case Name: Thomas H. Davidson, Jr. v. United States Postal Service
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Date Published: May 13, 1994
Citation: 24 F.3d 223
Docket Number: 94-3013
Court Abbreviation: Fed. Cir.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Log In