05a30421
03-18-2003
Martin Johnson Jr. v. Department of the Treasury
05A30421
3/18/03
.
Martin Johnson Jr.,
Complainant,
v.
John W. Snow,
Secretary,
Department of the Treasury,
Agency.
Request No. 05A30421
Appeal No. 01A14625
Agency No. 99-2223, 97-2063
Hearing No. 310-AO-5103X
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Martin Johnson Jr. (complainant) timely initiated a request to the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider
the decision in Martin Johnson Jr. v. Department of the Treasury, EEOC
Appeal No. 01A14625 (December 23, 2002). 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).
Complainant filed formal complaints alleging discrimination on the bases
of race (African-American) and reprisal (prior EEO activity), when he
was ranked below the best qualified cut-off score for a Stationary
Engineer position. The prior decision affirmed the AJ's finding of
no discrimination. Specifically, the prior decision determined that
complainant failed to establish that the agency's reasons for its actions
were a pretext for discrimination. In that regard, the prior decision
noted that complainant's ranking was low because of the manner in which
he presented him application.
After a review of complainant's request for reconsideration, 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. Complainant essentially
argues that which he raised on appeal. Complainant failed to present
any evidence that would establish the prior decision's determination as
to pretext involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material law
or fact. Indeed, complainant did not persuasively dispute the agency's
reasons for its actions. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 01A14625
remains the Commission's final decision. There is no further right of
administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request
for reconsideration.
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
3/18/03
Date