0520120273
12-06-2012
Howard E. Cosner, Jr., Complainant, v. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.
Howard E. Cosner, Jr.,
Complainant,
v.
Eric K. Shinseki,
Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
Agency.
Request No. 0520120273
Appeal No. 0120110073
Agency Nos. 200I-0673-2006103505
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Howard E. Cosner, Jr. v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 0120110073 (February 3, 2012). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its discretion, grant a request to 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).
In our precious decision, we found that the Agency had not breached the March 13, 2008, settlement agreement. We noted that that Agency had not breached the settlement agreement by divulging information to Complainant's Congressperson. We noted that Complainant sought help from his Congressperson in enforcing the agreement. We found that it was disingenuous for Complainant to contend that the Agency violated the agreement by providing information to his Congressperson. We did not address the Agency's argument that Complainant himself violated the Agreement, nor did we address Complainant's arguments that the Agency created a fraudulent employment application purporting to have come from Complainant.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant, in pertinent part, contends that he made no agreement with the Agency to divulge the specific monetary settlement amount to his Congressperson. Complainant contends that the Agency divulged this information to his Congressperson without informing him. Complainant contends that the correspondence from his Congressperson did not request that any confidential information be provided to her. Complainant also contends that our previous decision improperly failed to address the Agency's argument that he himself violated the settlement agreement when he sought employment with the Agency. Complainant contends that the Agency created a fraudulent employment application claiming to have come from him.
We note that a "request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission." Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110) (rev. Nov. 9, 1999), at 9-17; see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agriculture, EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). Rather, a reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate that the previous decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or (2) will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Complainant has not done so here. Complainant does not dispute that he sought help from his Congressperson and that no information was divulged to anyone else. We note that while Complainant reiterates arguments previously addressed in our previous decision, he does not identify any clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law.
After reviewing the previous decision and the entire record, the Commission finds that the request fails to meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to DENY the request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120110073 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request.
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0610)
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 (Z0610)
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 from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also 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 with the Court 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
December 6, 2012
Date
2
0520120273
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520120273