Elmon M. Elmore, Complainant,v.Bruce Babbitt, Secretary, Department of the Interior, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionNov 22, 2000
05a00964 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 22, 2000)

05a00964

11-22-2000

Elmon M. Elmore, Complainant, v. Bruce Babbitt, Secretary, Department of the Interior, Agency.


Elmon M. Elmore v. Department of the Interior

05A000964

November 22, 2000

.

Elmon M. Elmore,

Complainant,

v.

Bruce Babbitt,

Secretary,

Department of the Interior,

Agency.

Request No. 05A00964

Appeal No. 01972684

Agency Nos. FNP-90-009, FNP-90-057R

DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant initiated a request to the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider the decision in Elmon

M. Elmore v. Department of the Interior, EEOC Appeal No. 01972684

(December 11, 1998).<1> EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may,

in its discretion, reconsider any previous Commission decision where the

requesting party demonstrates that: (1) the appellate decision involved

a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or (2)

the appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies,

practices, or operations of the agency. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b).

On October 10, 1989, complainant filed a formal complaint alleging

discrimination on the bases of race (Black), color (black), national

origin (non-Hispanic), reprisal (prior EEO activity), and age (DOB:

10/5/28), when he was not selected for the position of Equal Employment

Opportunity Manager, GM-260-13, Southwest Region, on June 10, 1988.

Following an investigation, complainant requested a hearing before an

EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). The AJ thereafter issued Findings and

Conclusions Without a Hearing finding that complainant was discriminated

against on the basis of national origin only. The agency then issued

a final decision adopting the AJ's findings, but modified the relief

ordered.

On February 10, 1997, complainant filed an appeal with the Commission

arguing that the agency failed to properly implement its final decision.

See Elmore v. Department of Interior, EEOC Appeal No. 01972684. In our

prior decision, we found that complainant failed to present sufficient

documentation to show that the agency failed to properly implement its

FAD. We also noted that complainant's arguments essentially revolved

around events subsequent to the agency's issuance of its FAD, and alluded

to a potential retaliation complaint against the agency.

On January 15, 1999, complainant filed the instant request for

reconsideration. By letter dated August 3, 2000, the agency advised

the Commission that complainant has since deceased and complainant's

wife is proceeding with his case. Further, the agency notified the

Commission that on November 9, 1999, complainant had filed a civil action

(identified as Civil Action No. C99-4895) in the United States District

Court for the Northern District of California.

A review of the agency's August 3, 2000 letter and attachments discloses

that on October 2, 1997, complainant filed a second complaint with the

agency regarding, among other things, the agency's failure to properly

implement its FAD. The allegations contained in the civil action are the

same as those contained in the prior decision, as well as his October 2,

1997 complaint.

The regulation found at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409 provides that the filing

of a civil action "shall terminate Commission processing of the appeal."

Commission regulations mandate dismissal of the EEO complaint under these

circumstances so as to prevent a complainant from simultaneously pursuing

both administrative and judicial remedies on the same matters, wasting

resources, and creating the potential for inconsistent or conflicting

decisions, and in order to grant due deference to the authority of

the federal district court. See Stromgren v. Department of Veterans

Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05891079 (May 7, 1990); Sandy v. Department of

Justice, EEOC Appeal No. 01893513 (October 19, 1989); Kotwitz v. USPS,

EEOC Request No. 05880114 (October 25, 1988).

After a careful review of the record, we find that the civil action

addresses the subject of the prior appeal. Since complainant, by

filing the above referenced civil action, has elected to proceed in the

Federal Court system, all administrative processing of his complaint is

terminated. 29 C.F.R.

�1614.409. Complainant's request for reconsideration is DISMISSED.

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0900)

This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right

of administrative appeal from the Commission's decision. You have the

right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District

Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive

this decision. If you file a civil action, you must name as the defendant

in the complaint the person who is the official agency head or department

head, identifying that person by his or her full name and official title.

Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your case in court.

"Agency" or "department" means the national organization, and not the

local office, facility or department in which you work.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1199)

If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot

afford the services of an attorney, you may request that the Court appoint

an attorney to represent you and that the Court permit you to file the

action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.;

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c).

The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of

the Court. Filing a request for an attorney does not extend your time

in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action

must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above

("Right to File A Civil Action").

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

November 22, 2000

__________________

Date

1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's federal

sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations apply

to all federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in the

administrative process. Consequently, the Commission will apply

the revised regulations found at 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 in deciding the

present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the

Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.