01985817
05-22-2000
Randall L. Thurman, Complainant, v. Daniel R. Glickman, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Agency.
Randall L. Thurman v. Department of Agriculture
01985817
May 22, 2000
Randall L. Thurman, )
Complainant, )
) Appeal No. 01985817
v. ) Agency No. 931004
)
Daniel R. Glickman, )
Secretary, )
Department of Agriculture, )
Agency. )
)
)
DECISION
INTRODUCTION
Randall L. Thurman (complainant) timely filed an appeal on July 20,
1998, with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the Commission)
from a final agency decision (FAD), sent to complainant on June 25, 1998,
concerning a claim of unlawful employment discrimination in violation of
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e
et seq.<1> The Commission hereby accepts the appeal in accordance with
64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999)(to be codified at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.
ISSUE PRESENTED
Whether the agency correctly dismissed two of complainant's claims
because they were also contained in his civil action.
BACKGROUND
Complainant had been employed by the agency as a County Supervisor.
He filed a formal complaint on September 29, 1993, claiming discrimination
on the basis of race (White) when: 1) an investigator for the Office of
Advocacy and Enterprise improperly processed a Title VI investigation
concerning agency office operations; 2) on April 12, 1993, complainant
was detailed based on the findings of investigations into agency office
operations; and 3) on June 17, 1993, complainant was subjected to
discourteous behavior by the investigator's supervisor while attempting
to obtain information regarding the findings of the investigations into
agency office operations. The Administrative Judge (AJ) assigned by the
Commission determined that the case evidence did not warrant a hearing
because there was no genuine issue of material fact in dispute. The AJ
issued Findings and Conclusions dismissing claims (1) and (2) because the
matters were addressed in complainant's Civil Action No. 94-1679 (United
States District Court, Western District of Louisiana, Monroe Division),
and recommending a finding of no discrimination with respect to claim
(3). The agency's FAD adopted the AJ's recommended decision as its final
decision. This appeal followed. Since complainant specified that he was
only appealing the dismissal of claims (1) and (2), this decision will not
address the AJ's finding of no discrimination with respect to claim (3).
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
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. This regulation is patterned after the summary judgment procedure
set forth in Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The United
States Supreme Court has stated that summary judgment is appropriate
where the trier of fact determines that, given applicable substantive
law, no genuine issue of material fact exists. Anderson v. Liberty
Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). An issue is "genuine" if the
evidence is such that a reasonable fact-finder could find in favor of the
non-moving party. Oliver v. Digital Equip. Corp., 846 F.2d 103, 105 (1st
Cir. 1988). In the context of an administrative proceeding under Title
VII, summary judgment is appropriate if, after adequate investigation,
complainant has failed to establish the essential elements of his or
her case. Spangle v. Valley Forge Sewer Authority, 839 F.2d 171, 173
(3d Cir. 1988). In determining whether to grant summary judgment,
the trier of fact's function is not to weigh the evidence and render a
determination as to the truth of the matter, but only to determine whether
there exists a genuine factual dispute. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248-49.
Based on our careful de novo review of the entire record before us,
the Commission finds that the AJ's recommended findings and conclusions
properly summarized the relevant facts and referenced the appropriate
regulations, policies, and laws. We conclude that complainant raised the
same issues in his civil action as are contained in claims (1) and (2)
of his complaint, and that the AJ's dismissal of those claims was proper.
Accordingly, we discern no basis to disturb the AJ's recommended findings
and conclusions or the agency's adoption of the AJ's decision.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the agency is hereby AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0300)
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); 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 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:
05-22-00
Date Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director
Office of Federal Operations
CERTIFICATE 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
1 On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's federal
sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations 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. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the
Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.