Martin Edwin Andersen v. U. S. Merit Systems Protection Board; Department of Defense

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-1049
MARTIN EDWIN ANDERSEN,
Petitioner,
v.
U. S. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD; DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,
Respondents.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Merits Systems Protection Board. (DC-1221-
19-0058-W-1)
Submitted: May 18, 2023 Decided: May 23, 2023
Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Martin Edwin Andersen, Petitioner Pro Se. Andrew Hunter, UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Jeffrey Gauger, UNITED STATES
MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, Washington, D.C.; Tameka MeShaun
Collier, DEFENSE SECURITY COOPERATION AGENCY, Arlington, Virginia, for
Respondents.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Martin Edwin Andersen seeks review of the Merit Systems Protection Board’s
(MSPB) order denying Andersen’s petition for review of the administrative law judge’s
decision disposing of Andersen’s whistleblower complaint against the Department of
Defense (DOD). We have reviewed Andersen’s informal brief and conclude that Andersen
raises no meaningful challenge to the MSPB’s dispositive holdings. Any such challenges
are therefore now forfeited. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b) (limiting appellate review to issues raised
in informal brief); Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal
brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues
preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We grant the
MSPB’s motion to dismiss party, leaving the DOD as the sole respondent, see 5 U.S.C.
§ 7703(a)(2), and deny all other pending motions. We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court
and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED

-- 2 of 2 --