5 C.F.R. § 1201.113

Finality of decision

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The initial decision of the judge will become the Board's final decision 35 days after issuance. Initial decisions are not precedential.

(a) Exceptions. The initial decision will not become the Board's final decision if within the time limit for filing specified in 1201.114 of this part, any party files a petition for review or, if no petition for review is filed, files a request that the initial decision be vacated for the purpose of accepting a settlement agreement into the record.

(b) Petition for review denied. If the Board denies all petitions for review, the initial decision will become final when the Board issues its last decision denying a petition for review.

(c) Petition for review granted or case reopened. If the Board grants a petition for review or a cross petition for review, or reopens or dismisses a case, the decision of the Board is final if it disposes of the entire action.

(d) Extensions. The Board may extend the time limit for filing a petition for review for good cause shown as specified in § 1201.114. If no petition for review is filed within the extended time limit, the initial decision of the judge will become the Board's final decision upon the expiration of the extended time limit.

(e) Exhaustion. Administrative remedies are exhausted when a decision becomes final in accordance with this section.

(f) When the Board, by final decision or order, finds there is reason to believe a current Federal employee may have committed a prohibited personnel practice described at 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8) or 2302(b)(9)(A)(i), (B), (C), or (D), the Board will refer the matter to the Special Counsel to investigate and take appropriate action under 5 U.S.C. 1215.

[54 FR 53504, Dec. 29, 1989, as amended at 62 FR 59992, Nov. 6, 1997; 77 FR 62368, Oct. 12, 2012; 78 FR 39545, July 2, 2013; 89 FR 72962, Sept. 9, 2024]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5,106 cases (3,594 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Darlene BUTLER, Appellant, v. Togo D. WEST, Jr., Sec'y, Dep't of the Army, Appellee, 164 F.3d 634 (D.C. Cir. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Darlene BUTLER, Appellant, v. Togo D. WEST, Jr., Sec'y, Dep't of the Army, Appellee, 164 F.3d 634 (D.C. Cir. 1999). · cites it 4× “See 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 (b) (“If the Board denies all petitions for review, the initial decision will become final when the Board issues its last decision denying a petition for review.”

McCarthy v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 809 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “1995), we found that a pro forma letter from the Clerk denying repetitive motions to reopen was not a “final order or final decision” under 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 , and thus not reviewable.”

Jones v. U.S. Dep't of Just., 111 F. Supp. 3d 25 (D.D.C. 2015). · cites it 5× “3d at 638 ; 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 . “However, both the complainant and the agency can petition the full Board to review an initial decision.”

Susan Morris v. Gina McCarthy, 825 F.3d 658 (D.C. Cir. 2016). “See 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 . The employee may then challenge the agency’s decision by filing suit in district court within 30 days of receiving notice of the MSPB’s “judicially reviewable action.”

Carson v. Dep't of Energy, 398 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “See 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 (b). . This decision, No.”

Weed v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 571 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “” 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 (c) (emphasis added).”

Siler v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 908 F.3d 1291 (Fed. Cir. 2018). “The AJ's decision became the final decision of the Board, see 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 , and Mr. Siler timely sought review in this court, see 5 U.”

Smith v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 930 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2019). “The AJ's decision became the final decision of the Board, see 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 , and Mr. Smith timely sought review in this court, see 5 U.”

Tom Briggs v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., & United States, Intervenor, 331 F.3d 1307 (Fed. Cir. 2003). “See 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 (b) (2002). As a result, the DCPS terminated Briggs on April 23, 2002.”

Kenneth Johnson v. Dep't of Vets. Affairs, 2023 MSPB 9 (MSPB 2023). · cites it 2× “113 ( 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 ). ¶11 We ORDER the agency to cancel the removal action and to substitute a 30-day suspension effective June 23, 2017.”

Deborah L. Haines v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 44 F.3d 998 (Fed. Cir. 1995). · cites it 3× “Consistent with the Supreme Court’s admonitions to refrain from inventing new remedies in this area, we look to the Board’s regulation at 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 to determine what constitutes a “final order” for jurisdictional purposes.”

Jenkins v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 911 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2019). “21; see also 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113 (2014) (providing "[t]he initial decision of the judge will become the [MSPB]'s final decision [thirty-five] days after issuance" unless, inter alia, "any party files a petition for review").”

Show all 5,106 citing cases →

— 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113(a) — 1 case

Flora G. Dozier v. Dep't of Educ., 847 F.2d 841 (Fed. Cir. 1988).

— 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113(b) — 5 cases

Kenneth Loui v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 25 F.3d 1011 (Fed. Cir. 1994).

Scott B. Foster v. Dep't of the Interior (MSPB 2016).

Cassandra Denise Smith v. Dep't of Labor (MSPB 2017).

Ganoe (M.D. Penn. 2026).

— 5 C.F.R. § 1201.113(c) — 3 cases

Ganoe (M.D. Penn. 2026).

Lucero v. Conner, 536 F. Supp. 2d 672 (W.D. Tex. 2008).

Charlotte A. Vargas v. Dep't of the Air Force, 864 F.2d 149 (Fed. Cir. 1988).

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.