EEOC Appeal 2026003949

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Sector
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Virgina K.,1
Petitioner,
v.
Adam R. Telle,
Acting Secretary,
Department of the Army,
Agency.
Petition No. 2026003949
MSPB Nos. AT-0752-11-0634-C-1;
AT-0752-11-0634-X-l;
AT-1221-12-0591-C-1;
AT-1221-12-0591-X-1
DENIAL OF CONSIDERATION
Petitioner filed a petition with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC or Commission) seeking review of a Final Order dated July 14, 2026,
issued by the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB or Board). 	For the reasons
that follow, we DENY consideration of the petition.
At the time of events giving rise to this petition, Petitioner was a former Contract
Specialist at the Agency’s U.S. Army Engineer and Support Center in Huntsville,
Alabama. 	After the Agency had removed Petitioner from her position effective
November 3, 2009, Petitioner filed appeals with the MSPB challenging her
removal, alleging in part that the Agency discriminated against her based on race,
sex, and in reprisal for prior protected equal employment opportunity (EEO)
1 This 	case 	has 	been 	randomly 	assigned 	a 	pseudonym 	which 	will 	replace
Petitioner’s 	name 	when 	the 	decision 	is 	published 	to 	non-parties 	and 	the
Commission’s website.

2026003949	2
activity.2 Ultimately, on July 21, 2023, Petitioner and the Agency entered into a
settlement agreement to resolve her MSPB appeals. 	As a result, an MSPB
Administrative Judge (AJ) dismissed the MSPB appeals as settled and indicated
that Petitioner could seek enforcement of the settlement agreement from the Board.
On or around December 19, 2023, Petitioner filed a petition for enforcement before
the MSPB arguing that the Agency had breached various provisions of the
settlement agreement. 	On March 12, 2024, the MSPB AJ issued an Initial
Decision finding that the Agency had failed to comply with one provision of the
settlement agreement (issuing a “letter of sincere thanks”) but otherwise found that
the Agency was not in breach. 	Petitioner sought review by the full Board. 	In its
Final Order, the Board affirmed the Initial Decision and dismissed the petition for
enforcement.3 Petitioner then filed the instant petition with the Commission. 	In
her brief, Petitioner argues that we have jurisdiction over her petition because the
underlying mixed case appeal involved allegations of employment discrimination
and reprisal. She further argues that the Agency’s alleged breach of the settlement
agreement violated the “make-whole” remedial principles of Title VII.
EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission has jurisdiction over mixed case
appeals and complaints on which the MSPB has issued a decision that makes
determinations on allegations of discrimination. 	29 C.F.R. § 1614.303 et seq.
Here, the MSPB did not address any allegations of discrimination but instead
concluded that Petitioner failed to prove the Agency breached the settlement
agreement. 	Because the MSPB’s decision did not address any matters within the
Commission’s 	jurisdiction, 	the 	Commission 	has 	no 	jurisdiction 	to 	review
Petitioner’s case. See, e.g., Ingeborg B. v. Dep’t of Veterans Affs., EEOC Petition
No. 2024002303 (Apr. 8, 2024); Glenna D. v. Dep’t of Veterans Affs., EEOC
Petition No. 2020005159 (Oct. 26, 2020). We also note that the record is clear that
the MSPB retained jurisdiction over enforcement matters related to the settlement
agreement. 	While the underlying MSPB appeal may have involved claims of
discrimination, this is insufficient to bring the settlement agreement (reached in
another forum) under our jurisdiction.
2 One of Petitioner’s MSPB appeals also alleged the removal was the result of
whistleblowing retaliation.
3 The Board noted that the Agency had subsequently issued the “letter of sincere
thanks” prior to the issuance of the Final Order.

2026003949	3
Accordingly, we DENY consideration of the petition for review.
PETITIONER’S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (W0124)
This 	decision 	of 	the 	Commission 	is 	final, and 	there 	is 	no 	further 	right 	of
administrative appeal from the Commission’s decision. You have the right to file a
civil action in an appropriate United States District Court, based on the decision of
the Merit Systems Protection Board, within thirty (30) calendar days of 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 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.
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 Petitioner’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 22, 2026
Date