0520120001
03-16-2012
Jeanette A. Lewis, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Pacific Area), Agency.
Jeanette A. Lewis,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Pacific Area),
Agency.
Request No. 0520120001
Appeal No. 0120100084
Hearing Nos. 550-2007-00380X
550-2007-00371X
Agency Nos. 1F-946-0021-07
1F-946-0078-04
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Jeanette
A. Lewis v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120100084 (September
21, 2011). 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).
The previous decision affirmed the Agency’s implementation of an
Administrative Judge’s (AJ) decision, which was issued following a
hearing at which twenty-two witnesses testified. Complainant had filed
a complaint which alleged that the Agency had discriminated against her
based on her disability and in reprisal for her prior EEO activity when
she was harassed and not accommodated between February 2007 and April
2007, among other allegations. The AJ found that the Agency had not
subjected Complainant to harassment based on disability and reprisal and
that the Agency did not deny Complainant a reasonable accommodation.
The previous decision affirmed the AJ’s decision and the Agency’s
implementation of the decision.
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant argued that the previous
decision was incorrect. She stated that she was submitting documentation
not previously considered in her complaint, and she argued many of the
same points which were raised in her initial appeal. The Agency filed
a statement in opposition to Complainant’s request for reconsideration
in which it urged the Commission to deny Complainant’s request.
We find that Complainant’s request for reconsideration fails to show
that our previous decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation
of fact or law, or that it would have a substantial impact on the
policies, practices or operations of the Agency. Complainant advanced
many of the same arguments in her request for reconsideration as
were advanced, and considered, in the initial appeal. We note that a
request for reconsideration is not a second form of appeal. See e.g.,
Lopez v. Dep’t of Agriculture, EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20,
2007). Additionally, the Commission does not accept new evidence
submitted for the first time in a request for reconsideration without
some indication that the evidence was not readily available before the
appellate decision was issued. Complainant provided no such indication.
Andrews v. Dep't of the Navy, EEOC Request No. 05900215 (May 3, 1990)
(Commission indicated that a request to reconsider is not a means to
submit evidence that should have been provided before the Commission's
previous decision was issued). Complainant does not otherwise show that
the previous decision was clearly erroneous.
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. 0120100084 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
March 16, 2012
Date
2
0520120001
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520120001