Case: 23-1703    Document: 21     Page: 1    Filed: 11/06/2023




           NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.


   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                  ______________________

                  VONDELISE JONES,
                      Petitioner

                             v.

       MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD,
                     Respondent
               ______________________

                        2023-1703
                  ______________________

    Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection
 Board in No. CH-0831-20-0072-I-1.
                 ______________________

    Before LOURIE, MAYER, and STARK, Circuit Judges.
 PER CURIAM.

ORDER

      In response to this court’s August 30, 2023, show cause
 order, the Merit Systems Protection Board urges dismissal
 of this petition for review as untimely. Vondelise Jones has
 not responded.
     Ms. Jones appealed to the Board from a decision of the
 Office of Personnel Management finding she was not eligi-
 ble for a survivor annuity. The administrative judge af-
 firmed the decision. Ms. Jones petitioned the Board for
 review. On January 24, 2023, the Board dismissed her
Case: 23-1703     Document: 21     Page: 2    Filed: 11/06/2023




 2                                               JONES v. MSPB




 petition as untimely filed without good cause shown. This
 court received Ms. Jones’s petition on March 28, 2023 (63
 days after the Board’s January 2023 decision). *
     “[A] petition to review a final order or final decision of
 the Board shall be filed in the United States Court of Ap-
 peals for the Federal Circuit . . . within 60 days after the
 Board issues notice of the final order or decision.” 

(b)(1)(A). This requirement is “mandatory and juris-
 dictional,” and thus cannot be waived or equitably tolled.
 Fedora v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 

 (Fed.
 Cir. 2017) (citation omitted); cf. Fed. R. App. P. 26(b)(2)
 (prohibiting this court from extending or reopening the
 time to file the petition for review “unless specifically au-
 thorized by law”). Because Ms. Jones’s petition for our re-
 view was received outside of the 60-day filing deadline, we
 dismiss.
     Accordingly,
     IT IS ORDERED THAT:
     (1) The petition for review is dismissed.
     (2) Each party shall bear its own costs.




     *   Although Ms. Jones checked the box in her
 Form 10: Statement Concerning Discrimination indicating
 that she raised a discrimination claim before the Board, see
 ECF No. 7 at 1, the record before the court does not suggest
 she raised such a claim during the Board proceedings.
Case: 23-1703    Document: 21   Page: 3   Filed: 11/06/2023




 JONES v. MSPB                                          3



    (3) All pending motions are denied.
                                          FOR THE COURT




 November 6, 2023
      Date