Ouida L.,1 Complainant,v.Eric Fanning, Acting Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Apr 20, 2016

0520160115 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 20, 2016)

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

Ouida L.,1
Complainant,

v.

Eric Fanning,
Acting Secretary,
Department of the Army,
Agency.

Request No. 0520160115

Appeal No. 0120152168

Agency No. ARUSAR15MAR01009

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in EEOC Appeal No.
0120152168 (November 3, 2015). 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(c).

In her underlying complaint, Complainant alleged that the Agency subjected her to unlawful
discrimination on the bases of reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when her previous EEO
complaints were not properly processed or investigated. In its final decision, the Agency
dismissed the complaint, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(8), on the ground that the
complaint was premised on Complainant’s dissatisfaction with the processing of her prior
complaints. On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s dismissal, finding that the focus
of the instant complaint was Complainant’s dissatisfaction with the Agency’s handling of her
previous complaints and that dismissal of the instant complaint as a “spin-off” was appropriate.

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.

0520160115

2
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant admits that the gravamen of her complaint is
that an Agency employee “unlawfully interfered with processing of the [Complainant’s]
complaint to add a claim that [Complainant] had never asserted.” This is precisely the type of
complaint § 1614.107(a)(8) is designed to foreclose.2 In addition, the Agency’s determination
that the instant complaint is a prohibited spin-off is supported by the text of the complaint
including, for example, the following passages: “The processing of my formal complaint of
discrimination . . . has been severely compromised . . . “; “The report of investigation . . .
was woefully incomplete.” Report of Investigation at 22, 24. We find that Complainant’s
arguments do not 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. Accordingly, we find that Complainant has 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. 0120152168 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
2 The appropriate process for pursuing allegations of improper complaint processing is
addressed in Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614
(EEO MD-110), Chap. 5 § IV.D.

0520160115

3
court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. 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

April 20, 2016
Date