e-CFR banner

Home
gpo.gov
govinfo.gov

e-CFR Navigation Aids

Browse

Simple Search

Advanced Search

 — Boolean

 — Proximity

 

Search History

Search Tips

Corrections

Latest Updates

User Info

FAQs

Agency List

Incorporation By Reference

eCFR logo

Related Resources

 

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations

e-CFR data is current as of February 20, 2020

Title 5Chapter IISubchapter APart 1201Subpart C → §1201.117


Title 5: Administrative Personnel
PART 1201—PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES
Subpart C—Petitions for Review of Initial Decisions


§1201.117   Board decisions; procedures for review or reopening.

(a) In any case that is reopened or reviewed, the Board may:

(1) Issue a decision that decides the case;

(2) Hear oral arguments;

(3) Require that briefs be filed;

(4) Remand the appeal so that the judge may take further testimony or evidence or make further findings or conclusions; or

(5) Take any other action necessary for final disposition of the case.

(b) The Board may affirm, reverse, modify, or vacate the initial decision of the judge, in whole or in part. The Board may issue a final decision and, when appropriate, order a date for compliance with that decision.

(c) The Board may issue a decision in the form of a precedential Opinion and Order or a nonprecedential Order.

(1) Opinion and Order. An Opinion and Order is a precedential decision of the Board and may be appropriately cited or referred to by any party.

(2) Nonprecedential Orders. A nonprecedential Order is one that the Board has determined does not add significantly to the body of MSPB case law. The Board may, in its discretion, include in nonprecedential Orders a discussion of the issue(s) to assist the parties in understanding the reason(s) for the Board's disposition in a particular appeal. Nonprecedential Orders are not binding on the Board or its administrative judges in any future appeals except when it is determined they have a preclusive effect on parties under the doctrines of res judicata (claim preclusion), collateral estoppel (issue preclusion), judicial estoppel, or law of the case. Parties may cite nonprecedential Orders, but such orders have no precedential value; the Board and its administrative judges are not required to follow or distinguish them in any future decisions. In contrast, a precedential decision issued as an Opinion and Order has been identified by the Board as significantly contributing to the Board's case law.

[76 FR 60707, Sept. 30, 2011, as amended at 77 FR 62370, Oct. 12, 2012]

Need assistance?