Paul M. Brown, Complainant,v.Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 14, 1999
01986990 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 14, 1999)

01986990

12-14-1999

Paul M. Brown, Complainant, v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency.


Paul M. Brown, )

Complainant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01986990

) Agency No. 98-0252-SSA

Kenneth S. Apfel, )

Commissioner, )

Social Security Administration, )

Agency. )

____________________________________)

DISMISSAL

Complainant filed the instant appeal from the agency's August 14, 1998

letter informing complainant that accepted issues in his complaint would

be held in abeyance pending a decision regarding the certification of

a class action (which includes complainant).<1> There is no right to

directly appeal to the Commission a determination by the agency to

hold a complaint in abeyance. See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37659 (1999)

(to be codified as 29 C.F.R. �1614.401).

The agency has not clearly identified whether the class action is a

civil action or an administrative EEO complaint filed with the agency.

If the agency is referring to a class action filed in the United States

District Court for the District of Maryland (Civ. No. H-97-3154),

then the Commission notes that the class was determined to be not

entitled to certification in a decision issued on August 24, 1998.

Bostron, et al. v. Apfel, et. al., 182 F.R.D. 188, 195 (Aug. 24, 1998).

If, however, the agency is referring to a class complaint filed with

the agency, then the agency is reminded that an individual complaint

which has been subsumed within an administrative EEO class complaint

(not a civil action) shall be processed as an individual complaint of

discrimination. See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37658 (1999) (to be codified

as 29 C.F.R. �1614.204(d)(7)).

Because there is no right to file the instant appeal, the instant appeal

is DISMISSED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M1199)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the complainant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish 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.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, MUST BE FILED

WITH THE OFFICE OF FEDERAL OPERATIONS (OFO) WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR

DAYS of receipt of this decision or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS

OF RECEIPT OF ANOTHER PARTY'S TIMELY REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION. See

64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. �1614.405). All requests and arguments must be

submitted to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848, Washington, D.C. 20036. In the

absence of a legible postmark, the request to reconsider shall be deemed

timely filed if it is received by mail within five days of the expiration

of the applicable filing period. See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999)

(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. �1614.604).

The request or opposition must also include proof of service on the

other party.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances

prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation

must be submitted with your request for reconsideration. The Commission

will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only

in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.604(c).

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S1199)

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. If you

file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil

action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

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:

Dec. 14, 1999

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations

CERTIFICATION OF MAILING

For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision

was received within five (5) calendar days of mailing. I certify that

the decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative

(if applicable), and the agency on:

____________________ _________________________________

DATE EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

ASSISTANT1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's

federal sector complaint process went into effect which apply to all

federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in the administrative

process. Consequently, the Commission will apply the revised regulations

found at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the

present appeal.