Jarvis R.,1 Complainant,v.James N. Mattis, Secretary, Department of Defense (Defense Contract Management Agency), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Jun 14, 2018

0520180242 (E.E.O.C. Jun. 14, 2018)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013

Jarvis R.,1
Complainant,

v.

James N. Mattis,
Secretary,
Department of Defense
(Defense Contract Management Agency),
Agency.

Request No. 0520180242

Appeal No. 0120180408

Agency No. P6-17-0093

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120180408 (January 31, 2018). EEOC
Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its discretion, grant a request to reconsider any
previous Commission decision issued pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a), 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(c).

In his underlying complaint, Complainant alleged that the Agency subjected him to unlawful
discrimination on the basis of reprisal when: 1) the Department of Veterans Affairs, in
“collaboration” with the Agency, altered his medical records, denied him a copy of his records,
and tried to reduce his VA medical benefits; and 2) he was subjected to harassment when selecting
officials hired individuals improperly. In its final decision, the Agency dismissed Claim 1,
pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(1), for failure to state a claim and Claim 2, pursuant to 29
C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(8), for expressing dissatisfaction with the processing of a complaint.

1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant’s name
when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission’s website.
0520180242

2
On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s dismissal, on the ground that both Claims 1
and 2 fail to state a claim.

In his request for reconsideration, Complainant reiterates arguments he raised on appeal. Those
arguments are unavailing and largely unconnected to any claims of employment discrimination.
Rather, the gravamen of Complainant’s claims is wrongdoing unrelated to discriminatory animus
against Complainant. The previous decision correctly concluded that the complaint fails to state a
claim under the 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 regulations.

The Commission emphasizes 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), at 9-18 (Aug. 5, 2015); see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agric., EEOC Request No.
0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). Rather, a reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate
that the appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, or
will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency. Complainant
has not done so here. Accordingly, we find that Complainant failed to demonstrate that the
Commission should reconsider its appellate decision.

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(c), and it is the decision of the Commission to
deny the request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120180408 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 (Z0815)

If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may request
permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or costs.
Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may request the
court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or
appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission.
0520180242

3
The court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter
the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant’s Right to File
a Civil Action for the specific time limits).

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden’s signature
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations

June 14, 2018
Date