Opinions

Today the Federal Circuit released four nonprecedential opinion in pro se cases. The court also released three nonprecedential orders. One affirms a dismissal in a pro se case, one grants a summary affirmance, and one grants a dismissal. Here are the introductions to the opinions, the introduction to the order affirming the dismissal, and links to the other orders.

Wright v. McDonough (Nonprecedential)

Paul Wright appeals from a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”) denying his motion to recall the mandate and judgment of an earlier Veterans Court decision. For the reasons below, we dismiss.

Rodriquez v. Department of Homeland Security (Nonprecedential)

Former United States Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) employee Yvette V. Rodriguez appeals from a final decision of the United States Merit Systems Protection Board (“Board”) affirming an initial decision declining to reinstate Rodriguez after she was terminated from her position at DHS for failing to maintain a security clearance. Rodriguez v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., No. DC-0752- 17-0368-I-1 (M.S.P.B. Mar. 29, 2023) (“Final Decision”), S.A. 1–6; see also Rodriguez v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., No. DC-0752-17-0368-I-1 (M.S.P.B. June 20, 2017) (“Initial Decision”), S.A. 7–17. For the following reasons, we affirm.

Yomi v. Merit Systems Protection Board (Nonprecedential)

Francis Yomi appeals a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board (Board) dismissing his appeal for lack of jurisdiction. For the following reasons, we affirm.

ElHelbawy v. Department of Commerce (Nonprecedential)

Mona ElHelbawy worked for the federal government in the United States Department of Commerce. After a sustained absence from work, she was removed from her job. Ms. ElHelbawy appealed the removal to the Merit Systems Protection Board under 5 U.S.C. ch. 75, asserting in part that her removal constituted whistleblower retaliation. The Board rejected that appeal on the merits, but it concluded that Ms. ElHelbawy had sought to present a broader appeal on whistleblower grounds (not limited to the removal action) under the statutory sections providing for an individual right of action (IRA), 5 U.S.C. §§ 1214, 1221, and the Board forwarded the IRA appeal to the relevant administrative judge so that it could be addressed. Upon addressing the IRA appeal, the administrative judge dismissed it for outside the Board’s jurisdiction and as (partially) barred by res judicata, ElHelbawy v. Department of Commerce, No. DE-1221-15-0438-W-1, 2017 WL 2774838 (M.S.P.B. June 21, 2017) (2017 Decision), and the full Board affirmed that decision, ElHelbawy v. Department of Commerce, No. DE-1221-15-0438-W-1, 2022 WL 14935535 (M.S.P.B. Oct. 26, 2022) (2022 Decision). Ms. ElHelbawy appeals. We affirm the Board’s decision.

Jones v. McDonough (Nonprecedential Order)

Terris R. Jones, Sr., appeals a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans’ Court”), which dismissed an appeal of a remand order of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (“Board”) for lack of jurisdiction. Jones v. McDonough, No. 23-660, 2023 WL 2249242, at *2 (Vet. App. Feb. 28, 2023). For the reasons set forth below, the dismissal is affirmed.

Summary Affirmance

Dismissal