1. “Can the full MSPB authorize removal of an Administrative Law Judge based in part on that Judge’s explicit adherence to written Agency Policy?”
2. “Can the full MSPB deprive Petitioner of due process by rejecting Petitioner’s attempt to introduce into the record evidence that was in the Respondent’s possession at all times pertinent to this case, is material and dispositive of a substantial part of the case, was in part improperly withheld from Petitioner by Respondent, and was only discovered by Petitioner through his use of FOIA and chance discoveries, all occurring after the trial concluded?”
3. “Can the full MSPB authorize disciplinary action against an ALJ based on an unconstitutionally vague standard regarding ‘conduct unbecoming’?”
4. “Can the full MSPB authorize disciplinary action against an ALJ for a matter that was amicably resolved prior to the institution of MSPB proceedings?”
5. “Can the full MSPB authorize disciplinary action against an ALJ for allegedly failing to sufficiently memorialize off-the-record conversations with Counsel, where the Agency introduced only five cases as examples of this alleged misconduct out of the thousands of cases the ALJ presided over, and no objective standard of ‘sufficiency’ existed?”
1. “Because Mr. Cooperman has not explained how the Board’s decision lacks substantial evidence or contains any legal error, we see no basis to disturb the Board’s findings.”
2. “[W]e hold that the Board’s decision removing Mr. Cooperman from his position was supported by substantial evidence.”
3. “Mr. Cooperman has not persuasively explained why his “conduct unbecoming” charge is impermissibly vague.”
4. “[W]e are unpersuaded that the Board abused its discretion by declining to accept this additional evidence after the record closed.”
5. “We have considered Mr. Cooperman’s remaining arguments and find them unpersuasive.”
