Ellawendy v. MSPB

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Ellawendy v. MSPB

Opinion

Case: 24-1477 Document: 21 Page: 1 Filed: 05/20/2024

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________

ABDELFATAH S. ELLAWENDY, Petitioner

v.

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, Respondent ______________________

2024-1477 ______________________

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in No. SF-0752-18-0471-I-1. ______________________

Before LOURIE, DYK, and REYNA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. ORDER In light of AbdelFatah S. Ellawendy’s Statement Con- cerning Discrimination and the decision of the Merit Sys- tems Protection Board, the court directed the parties to show cause why this case should not be transferred to a federal district court. The Board’s response to that order urges the court to dismiss the petition, while Mr. Ellawendy urges this court to retain jurisdiction. Federal district courts, not this court, have jurisdiction over “[c]ases of discrimination subject to the provisions of Case: 24-1477 Document: 21 Page: 2 Filed: 05/20/2024

2 ELLAWENDY v. MSPB

[5 U.S.C.] § 7702,” 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2)—i.e., where an em- ployee has made a non-frivolous allegation regarding an ac- tion appealable to the Board and that the action was based, at least in part, on covered discrimination. Perry v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 582 U.S. 420, 432 (2017). Here, Mr. Ellawendy alleged before the Board that his resignation was involuntary and the result of covered dis- crimination, so jurisdiction to review the Board’s decision would generally lie in district court. Although 28 U.S.C. § 1631 authorizes this court, when it lacks jurisdiction over the case, to transfer to an appropriate district court, we see no basis for doing so here at least because we understand Mr. Ellawendy has sought review of the Board’s decision in a pending case in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. See Ellawendy v. Wormuth, No. 3:24-cv-00265-AGT (N.D. Cal. Jan. 16, 2024). We therefore dismiss this petition. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The petition is dismissed. (2) All pending motions are denied. (3) Each party shall bear its own costs. FOR THE COURT

May 20, 2024 Date

Reference

Status
Unpublished