Kory V.,1 Complainant,v.James N. Mattis, Secretary, Department of Defense (National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Nov 30, 2018

0520180559 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 30, 2018)

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

Kory V.,1
Complainant,

v.

James N. Mattis,
Secretary,
Department of Defense
(National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency),
Agency.

Request No. 0520180559

Appeal No. 0120181095

Agency No. NGAE00322017

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120181095 (July 12, 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).

On May 5, 2017, Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency subjected him to
discrimination on the bases of religion (Jewish), age (71), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO
activity, when, he learned on March 28, 2017, that a former supervisor “at some time in 2016,”
replied to an inquiry from a prospective employer and provided a negative reference.

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.
0520180559

2
The Agency dismissed the complaint on the grounds that the claims therein were substantially the
same as those that were pending a hearing in an earlier complaint. In our previous decision, we
affirmed the Agency’s dismissal of the complaint, noting that Complainant failed to specify any
new personnel action that had occurred.

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. He has not presented any argument or evidence tending to establish the
existence of either reconsideration criterion. He merely argues that in our previous decision, we
erred in not accepting his proposal to consolidate the instant complaint with the earlier complaint.
In other words, Complainant attempts to reargue the merits of the appeal.

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. 0120181095 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.
0520180559

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

November 30, 2018
Date