(a) In all grievances other than those concerning disciplinary actions, the grievant has the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the grievance is meritorious.
(b) Where a grievant establishes that an evaluation contained falsely prejudicial material which may have been a substantial factor in an agency action, and the question is presented whether the agency would have taken the same action had the evaluation not contained that material, the burden will shift to the agency to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it would have done so.
(c) Where a grievant establishes that a procedural error occurred which is of such a nature that it may have been a substantial factor in an agency action with respect to the grievant, and the question is presented whether the agency would have taken the same action had the procedural error not occurred, the burden will shift to the agency to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it would have done so.
[50 FR 31356, Aug. 2, 1985]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case:
Ehrman v. United States, 429 F. Supp. 2d 61 (D.D.C. 2006).
Ehrman v. United States, 429 F. Supp. 2d 61 (D.D.C. 2006).
· cites it 2× “In its proceedings on remand, the FSGB must take care to ensure that the proper party carries the burden under the standards set forth in 22 C.F.R. § 905.1 . If the FSGB finds that Ehrman’s claims relating to his skill code and protection from low-ranking have merit and the…”
Toy v. United States, 263 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Frost was “outspoken, argumentative and not always quickly responsive,” there was also ample evidence to suggest that the statements in the plaintiffs EER re *7 garding his supervisory abilities (or deficiencies) are also true.”
Aragon v. Tillerson, 240 F. Supp. 3d 99 (D.D.C. 2017).
“at 53 (quoting 22 CFR § 905.1 ). The plaintiff appealed the HR/G’s decision to the FSGB.”
Ackerman v. United States, 324 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2004).
· cites it 2× “The court remanded the issue to the FSGB, ordering it to apply the standard in 22 C.F.R. § 905.1 (c) and “determine whether the agency can show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it would have removed Ackerman from the Foreign Service, absent the procedural error caused…”
Olson v. Clinton, 602 F. Supp. 2d 93 (D.D.C. 2009).
“” 22 C.F.R. § 905.1 (b). When he makes this allegation, the grievant bears the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that his claim is meritorious.”
Shea v. United States, 45 F. Supp. 2d 54 (D.D.C. 1999).
· cites it 9× “The FSGB also held that the plaintiff had failed to establish his case sufficiently to implicate the burden-shifting provision of 22 C.F.R. § 905.1 (b), a subject the Court will discuss in more detail below.”
Gonzalez v. U.S. Dep't of State, 135 F. Supp. 2d 193 (D.D.C. 2001).
“At the agency level, plaintiff had the burden of establishing this by a preponderance of the evidence.”
Kelly v. United States, 34 F. Supp. 2d 8 (D.D.C. 1998).
“Pursuant to 22 C.F.R. § 905.1 , the Board remanded the grievances to the Agency to permit it to convene a reconstituted C/Board that would retroactively consider whether the Plaintiffs would have been entitled to an LCE in 1992 had the Agency properly held a review for them.”
Bettucci v. United States, 14 F. Supp. 2d 45 (D.D.C. 1998).
“22 C.F.R. § 905.1 (a). In the instant case, Bettucci raised ten separate claims for financial reimbursement.”
Beberman v. Blinken (D.D.C. 2024).
· cites it 3× “She argues that because there was a procedural violation here— the improper composition of the tenure boards—under 22 C.F.R. § 905.1 (c), the burden shifts to the Department to show that she would have been denied tenure even if the tenure boards had been properly composed.”
Beberman v. Blinken (D.D.C. 2024).
“at 11–12; see also 22 C.F.R. § 905.1 (a). Beberman appealed this denial to the Foreign Service Grievance Board (“the Board”) in January 2016.”
Beberman v. Blinken (D.D.C. 2025).
“1986) (en banc); see also 22 C.F.R. § 905.1 (a) (By State Department regulation, “[i]n all grievances other than those concerning disciplinary actions, the grievant has the burden of estab- lishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the grievance is meritorious.”
— 22 C.F.R. § 905.1(a) — 1 case
Shea v. United States, 45 F. Supp. 2d 54 (D.D.C. 1999).
“The FSGB also held that the plaintiff had failed to establish his case sufficiently to implicate the burden-shifting provision of 22 C.F.R. § 905.1 (b), a subject the Court will discuss in more detail below.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.