Ramzan A. Jiwani, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJun 23, 2005
01a52696 (E.E.O.C. Jun. 23, 2005)

01a52696

06-23-2005

Ramzan A. Jiwani, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Ramzan A. Jiwani v. United States Postal Service

01A52696

June 23, 2005

.

Ramzan A. Jiwani,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A52696

Agency No. 1H-336-0108-03

Hearing No. 150-2004-00483X

DECISION

Complainant appeals to the Commission from the agency's January 19, 2005

decision finding no discrimination. Complainant alleges discrimination

on the bases of race (Asian), color (brown), religion (Muslim/Islam),

sex (male), national origin (Pakistani), age (51) and reprisal when,

on June 6, 2003,<1> he was issued a letter of suspension for not being

gainfully employed. On January 12, 2005, an Administrative Judge

(AJ) issued a decision without a hearing, concluding that there are no

material facts in dispute and that complainant has failed to establish

by a preponderance of the evidence that he was discriminated against by

the agency. The agency, on January 19, 2005, issued a decision adopting

the AJ's decision finding no discrimination. Complainant now appeals

from the agency's January 19, 2005 decision.

The Commission's regulations allow an AJ to issue a decision without a

hearing when he or she finds that there is no genuine issue of material

fact. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.109(g). This regulation is patterned after the

summary judgment procedure set forth in Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that summary judgment

is appropriate where a court determines that, given the substantive

legal and evidentiary standards that apply to the case, there exists

no genuine issue of material fact. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.,

477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). In ruling on a motion for summary judgment,

a court's function is not to weigh the evidence but rather to determine

whether there are genuine issues for trial. Id. at 249. The evidence of

the non-moving party must be believed at the summary judgment stage and

all justifiable inferences must be drawn in the non-moving party's favor.

Id. at 255. An issue of fact is �genuine� if the evidence is such that

a reasonable fact finder could find in favor of the non-moving party.

Celotex v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986); Oliver v. Digital

Equip. Corp., 846 F.2d 103, 105 (1st Cir. 1988). A fact is �material�

if it has the potential to affect the outcome of the case. If a case

can only be resolved by weighing conflicting evidence, summary judgment

is not appropriate. In the context of an administrative proceeding,

an AJ may properly consider summary judgment only upon a determination

that the record has been adequately developed for summary disposition.

The record indicates that on May 28, 2003, complainant was outside of

his assigned work area without permission. In response, complainant's

supervisor, who was unaware of any of complainant's prior EEO

activity, issued complainant a seven-day suspension for Unsatisfactory

Performance-Failure to Follow Instructions. The record indicates

that complainant's supervisor had made previous efforts to correct

complainant's work performance of not staying in his assigned work

area, all of which were unsuccessful. Complainant's supervisor thus

issued the suspension after complainant had continually failed to follow

instructions. An entry of findings and conclusions without a hearing,

subsequently implemented by the agency, is appropriate since there are

no genuine issues of material fact and no genuine issues of credibility

when the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to complainant.

Complainant has failed to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that

he was discriminated against on the bases of race (Asian), color (brown),

religion (Muslim/Islam), sex (male), national origin (Pakistani), age

(51), or reprisal.

The agency's decision finding no discrimination is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0701)

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 29

C.F.R. � 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for

29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), 9-18 (November 9, 1999). 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 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 (S0900)

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:

______________________________

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

June 23, 2005

__________________

Date

1 Although the agency and the AJ indicate that on May 28, 2003,

complainant was issued a letter of suspension for not being gainfully

employed, the record indicates that the Notice of Suspension was

actually issued on June 6, 2003; on May 28, 2003, complainant was

observed standing in the 112 Operation talking to a mail handler

(the behavior which led to the June 6, 2003 suspension).