EEOC Appeal 2025003676

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Sector
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Shellie T.,1
Complainant,
v.
Hung Cao,
Acting Secretary,
Department of the Navy,
Agency.
Appeal No. 2025003676
Hearing No. 570-2025-00183X
Agency No. 23-64267-01503
DECISION
Complainant filed an appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC or Commission), pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(a), from the Agency’s
June 23, 2025 final order concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO)
complaint 	of 	employment 	discrimination 	in 	violation 	of 	Section 	501 	of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et
seq. 	For the following reasons, the Commission AFFIRMS the Agency’s final
order.
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a
Contract Specialist at the Agency’s Naval Acquisition Development Program
(NADP), Washington Navy Yard, facility in Washington, D.C.
1 	This 	case 	has 	been 	randomly 	assigned 	a 	pseudonym 	which 	will 	replace
Complainant’s 	name 	when 	the 	decision 	is 	published 	to 	non-parties 	and 	the
Commission’s website.

2025003676	2
On January 2, 2024, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency
discriminated against her and subjected her to a hostile work environment on the
bases of disability (anxiety) and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when:
1. 	From May 8, 2023 to July 31, 2023, management failed to provide
Complainant with proper guidance and/or support for her role as a
Contract Specialist;
2. 	On or around June 22, 2023, Complainant was asked if she planned on
hurting 	herself 	after 	she 	expressed 	to 	personnel 	in 	the 	Human
Resources Department that she had anxiety and she had been feeling
overwhelmed, had panic attacks, and was seeking extra support;
3. 	On or around June 27, 2023, Complainant was told that she was to
start having daily meetings with her Supervisor;
4. 	On or around July 3, 2023 and July 7, 2023, Complainant was
subjected to unwarranted scrutiny when she did not display her
workload tracker during her daily meetings with her Supervisor;
5. 	On or around July 5, 2023, Complainant was subjected to unwarranted
scrutiny when she was eight minutes late to her daily meeting with her
Supervisor; and
6. 	On or around August 23, 2023, Complainant’s employment was
terminated.
At the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a
copy of the report of investigation and notice of her right to request a hearing
before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). 	Complainant timely requested a
hearing. 	The AJ issued a summary judgment decision finding that Complainant
was not subjected to discrimination or reprisal. The Agency subsequently issued a
final order fully adopting the AJ’s decision. This appeal followed.
In rendering this appellate decision, we must scrutinize the AJ’s legal and factual
conclusions, and the Agency’s final order adopting them, de novo. 	See 29 C.F.R.
§ 1614.405(a) (stating that a “decision on an appeal from an Agency’s final action
shall be based on a de novo review . . .”). 	The Commission’s regulations allow an
AJ to issue a decision without a hearing upon finding that there is no genuine issue
of material fact. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.109(g). A “genuine issue of fact” is one that a
reasonable judge could find in favor for the non-moving party. Celotex v. Catrett,
477 U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986); Oliver v. Digital Equip. Corp., 846 F.2d 103, 105
(1st Cir. 1988). A “material” fact has the potential to affect the outcome of a case.

2025003676	3
We carefully reviewed the record and found that it is adequately developed. To
successfully oppose a decision without a hearing, Complainant must identify
material facts of record that are in dispute or present further material evidence
establishing facts in dispute. Here, Complainant failed to show that there were any
genuine disputes of material fact or credibility issues warranting a hearing.
Even 	construing 	any 	inferences 	raised 	by 	the 	undisputed 	facts 	in 	favor 	of
Complainant, a reasonable factfinder could not find in Complainant’s favor.
Complainant did not show that similarly situated persons were treated differently.
While Complainant asserts that she was not given the training and support that she
expected, she did not show that this was due to any request for a reasonable
accommodation 	or 	a 	known 	disability. 	The 	named 	supervisors 	who 	were
responsible 	for 	her 	termination 	did 	not 	know 	that 	she 	made 	a 	reasonable
accommodation request. The Agency offered a legitimate reason for its actions.
The supervisors concluded that Complainant did not possess the fitness and
qualifications 	needed 	for 	successful 	continued 	employment 	and 	decided 	to
terminate her employment during her probationary period.
Based on our review of the record and the contentions on appeal, including those
not specifically addressed herein, we conclude that the entry of summary judgment
was appropriate. Even viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to her,
Complainant did not show that the Agency discriminated against her, as alleged.
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency’s final order.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1125)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider this appellate decision if
Complainant or the Agency submits a written request that contains arguments or
evidence that tend to establish that:
1. 	The appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of
material fact or law; or
2. 	The appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies,
practices, or operations of the agency.
Requests for reconsideration must be filed with EEOC’s Office of Federal Sector
(OFS) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision. 	If the party

2025003676	4
requesting reconsideration elects to file a statement or brief in support of the
request, that statement or brief must be filed together with the request for
reconsideration. 	A party shall have twenty (20) calendar days from receipt of
another party’s request for reconsideration within which to submit a brief or
statement 	in 	opposition. 	See 	29 	C.F.R. 	§ 	1614.405; 	Equal 	Employment
Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at
Chap. 9 § VII.B (Aug. 5, 2015).
Complainant should submit their request for reconsideration, and any statement or
brief in support of their request, via the EEOC Public Portal, which can be found at
https://publicportal.eeoc.gov/Portal/Login.aspx. 	Alternatively, Complainant can
submit their request and arguments to the Director, Office of Federal Sector, Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, via regular mail addressed to P.O. Box
77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail addressed to 131 M Street,
NE, Washington, DC 20507. In the absence of a legible postmark, a complainant’s
request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if OFS receives it by mail within
five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. 	See 29 C.F.R. §
1614.604.
An agency’s request for reconsideration must be submitted in digital format via the
EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). 	See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g).
Either party’s request and/or statement or brief in opposition must also include
proof of service on the other party, unless Complainant files their request via the
EEOC Public Portal, in which case no proof of service is required.
Failure to file within the 30-day time period will result in dismissal of the party’s
request 	for 	reconsideration 	as 	untimely, 	unless 	extenuating 	circumstances
prevented the timely filing of the request. 	Any supporting documentation must
be submitted together with the request for reconsideration. 	The Commission
will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only in very
limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604(f).
COMPLAINANT’S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0124)
You have the right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District
Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive this
decision. 	If you file a civil action, you must name as the defendant in the
complaint the person who is the official Agency head or department head,
identifying that person by their full name and official title. 	Failure to do so may

2025003676	5
result in the dismissal of your case in court. “Agency” or “department” means the
national organization, and not the local office, facility or department in which you
work. If you file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil
action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0815)
If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so,
you may request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without
paying these fees or costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent
you in the civil action, you may request the court to appoint an attorney for you.
You must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or appointment of an
attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The court has the sole
discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter the
time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant’s
Right to File a Civil Action for the specific time limits).
FOR THE COMMISSION:
T. Gimbrere
____________________________ 	Gul Chaudhry’s signature
T. Gimbrere, Acting Director
Office of Federal Sector
September 28, 2026
Date