HARRIS v. MSPB , No. 23-1521 (Fed. Cir. 2023)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 23-1521 Document: 11 Page: 1 Filed: 08/17/2023 NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ D’ANDREA L. HARRIS, Petitioner v. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, Respondent ______________________ 2023-1521 ______________________ Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in No. CH-0752-16-0501-I-1. ______________________ Before CHEN, MAYER, and STOLL, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. ORDER Because D’Andrea L. Harris pursued discrimination claims before the Merit Systems Protection Board and in her opening brief here, the court directed Ms. Harris to show cause why her case should not be transferred to a United States district court. She has not responded. We have jurisdiction to review final decisions from the Board, except in “[c]ases of discrimination subject to the provisions of [5 U.S.C. § ]7702,” 5 U.S.C. §§ 7703(b)(2), (b)(1)(A). Those cases, which involve appeals to the Board Case: 23-1521 Document: 11 2 Page: 2 Filed: 08/17/2023 HARRIS v. MSPB and allegations of covered discrimination, 5 U.S.C. § 7702(a)(1), belong in district court. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2); Perry v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 582 U.S. 420 (2017). Though “explicit waiver of [ ] discrimination claims . . . effectively converts the case to a standard appeal of the adverse personnel action,” Harris v. SEC, 972 F.3d 1307, 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2020), Ms. Harris has not provided such waiver. We therefore find it appropriate to transfer this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631 to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The petition for review and all the filings are transmitted to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631. FOR THE COURT August 17, 2023 Date /s/ Jarrett B. Perlow Jarrett B. Perlow Clerk of Court

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.