Archuleta v. Hopper

Full title: Katherine ARCHULETA, Director, Office of Personnel Management, Petitioner…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Date published: May 13, 2015

786 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2015)

Opinion

No. 2013–3177.

05-13-2015

Katherine ARCHULETA, Director, Office of Personnel Management, Petitioner v. Tony D. HOPPER, Respondent Merit Systems Protection Board, Respondent.

Allison Kidd–Miller, Department of Justice, Steven E. Abow, Assistant General Counsel, Robert James Girouard, Senior Counsel, Kamala Vasagam, Kathie A. Whipple, Esq., Office Of Personnel Management Office Of General Counsel, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Andres Myles Grajales, American Federation of Government Employees Office of General Counsel, Washington, DC, for Tony D. Hopper. Jeffrey Gauger, Esq., Merit Systems Protection Board, Washington, DC, for Merit Systems Protection Board.

PER CURIAM.

Allison Kidd–Miller, Department of Justice, Steven E. Abow, Assistant General Counsel, Robert James Girouard, Senior Counsel, Kamala Vasagam, Kathie A. Whipple, Esq., Office Of Personnel Management Office Of General Counsel, Washington, DC, for Petitioner.

Andres Myles Grajales, American Federation of Government Employees Office of General Counsel, Washington, DC, for Tony D. Hopper.

Jeffrey Gauger, Esq., Merit Systems Protection Board, Washington, DC, for Merit Systems Protection Board.

Before LOURIE, O'MALLEY, and REYNA, Circuit Judges.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

Katherine Archuleta, Director of the Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”), filed a petition for rehearing en banc. A response to the petition was invited by the court and filed by Respondent Merit Systems Protection Board and Respondent Tony D. Hopper. After careful consideration, the panel grants OPM's petition for the limited purpose of clarifying this court's opinion.

It Is Ordered That:

(1) OPM's petition for rehearing is granted for the limited purpose of clarifying that the Merit Systems Protection Board had jurisdiction to review Respondent Tony D. Hopper's debarment and cancellation of eligibilities as part of a unified penalty arising from the same set of circumstances as his removal. In all other respects, the petition is denied.

(2) The prior opinion in this appeal, which issued on December 8, 2014, and was reported at Archuleta v. Hopper, 773 F.3d 1289 (Fed.Cir.2014), is withdrawn and replaced with the revised opinion accompanying this order.