Rogers v. Department of Homeland Security , 120 F. App'x 804 ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                      NOTE: Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47.6, this disposition
    is not citable as precedent. It is a public record.
    United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    04-3214
    MATTHEW J. ROGERS,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
    Respondent.
    __________________________
    DECIDED: December 14, 2004
    __________________________
    Before NEWMAN, MICHEL, and GAJARSA, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM.
    Matthew J. Rogers (“Rogers”) petitions for review of the final decision of the Merit
    Systems Protection Board (“Board”), dismissing for lack of jurisdiction his appeal of his
    removal from a position with the Department of Homeland Security (“Homeland
    Security”).     Rogers v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., No. BN-0752-03-0179-I-1 (M.S.P.B.
    Feb. 2, 2004). Because the Board correctly determined that it did not have jurisdiction
    over Rogers’ appeal because Rogers failed to produce any evidence showing that he
    was an “employee” of the federal government for purposes of Board jurisdiction, we
    affirm.
    Since July 28, 2002, Rogers held a permanent excepted appointment as a Civil
    Aviation Security Specialist, also known as a Federal Air Marshal, with the Department
    of Homeland Security. On August 11, 2003, one year and two weeks after the effective
    date of his appointment, Homeland Security terminated Rogers for misconduct.
    On September 9, 2003, Rogers appealed his removal to the Board.             On
    September 12, 2003, the administrative judge (“AJ”) assigned to the case ordered
    Rogers to present evidence and argument to establish that the Board had jurisdiction
    over his appeal. Rogers did not, however, respond to this order. On October 3, 2003,
    Homeland Security moved to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction. Rogers did not
    respond to this motion.
    In an initial decision dated October 20, 2003, the AJ dismissed Rogers’ appeal
    for lack of jurisdiction because Rogers did not present any evidence responding to
    either    the   order     or   motion.    Rogers      v.   Dep’t   of   Homeland   Sec.,
    No. BN-0752-03-0179-I-1 (Oct. 20, 2003).
    The AJ’s initial decision became the final decision of the Board on
    February 2, 2004, after the Board denied Rogers’s petition for review for failure to meet
    the criteria set forth in 
    5 C.F.R. § 1201.115
    (d). Rogers v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., No.
    BN-0752-03-0179-I-1 (Feb. 2, 2004).       This appeal followed.     We have jurisdiction
    pursuant to 
    28 U.S.C. § 1295
    (a)(9).
    An appellant has the burden of establishing the Board's jurisdiction by a
    preponderance of the evidence. 
    5 C.F.R. § 1201.56
    (a)(2); Forest v. Merit Sys. Prot.
    Bd., 
    47 F.3d 409
    , 410 (Fed. Cir. 1995).         Here, Rogers had to prove that his prior
    2
    position was similar to his Federal Air Marshal position because he held the latter
    position for less than two years. 
    5 U.S.C. § 7511
    (a)(1)(C)(ii).
    The Board correctly determined that Rogers utterly failed to show such similarity.
    Rogers completely failed to respond to the AJ’s order to show cause, offering neither
    affidavit evidence nor any other form of evidence to establish Board jurisdiction. Rogers
    likewise completely failed to respond to Homeland Security’s motion to dismiss.
    Rogers, therefore, did not satisfy his burden of proving the Board’s jurisdiction by a
    preponderance of the evidence.        Accordingly, the decision of the Board dismissing
    Rogers' appeal for lack of jurisdiction is affirmed.
    AFFIRMED.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2004-3214

Citation Numbers: 120 F. App'x 804

Judges: Gajarsa, Michel, Newman, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 12/14/2004

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023