(a) Suspension period. The judge may issue an order suspending the processing of an appeal for up to 30 days. The judge may grant a second order suspending the processing of an appeal for up to an additional 30 days.
(b) Early termination of suspension period. The administrative judge may terminate the suspension period upon joint request of the parties or where the parties request the judge's assistance and the judge's involvement is likely to be extensive.
(c) Termination of suspension period. If the final day of any suspension period falls on a day on which the Board is closed for business, adjudication shall resume as of the first business day following the expiration of the period.
(d) Mediation. Whenever an appeal is accepted into the Board's Mediation Appeals Program (MAP), the processing of the appeal and all deadlines are suspended until the mediator returns the case to the judge. This provision does not apply where the parties enter into other forms of alternative dispute resolution.
[77 FR 62365, Oct. 12, 2012]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
10
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case:
Koch v. White, 251 F. Supp. 3d 162 (D.D.C. 2017).
Koch v. White, 251 F. Supp. 3d 162 (D.D.C. 2017).
“See 5 C.F.R. §§ 1201.28 (f), 1201.51(c) (2010).”
Ferrell v. Hud (Fed. Cir. 2023).
· cites it 6× “Ferrell’s ap- peal suspended the case proceedings in June 2021 for thirty days pursuant to 5 C.F.R. § 1201.28 , which permits an administrative judge to make two such suspensions.”
Kenneth M. Lee v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2016).
“After OPM failed to timely respond to the administrative judge’s multiple orders, she suspended case processing for 30 days under 5 C.F.R. § 1201.28 (a) to allow OPM additional time to submit a response.”
Diana M Zamarripa v. Dep't of Homeland Sec. (MSPB 2024).
“IAF, Tab 41; see 5 C.F.R. § 1201.28 (b). Because none of the orders denying the appellant’s motions to compel discuss or rely on the agency’s claim of privilege in their denials, we find no merit to the appellant’s argument on review, and we find no abuse of discretion.”
Lisa Scott v. Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev. (MSPB 2024).
“See 5 C.F.R. §§ 1201.28 , 1201.41 (granting an administrative judge wide discretion to control initial appeal proceedings, including the discretion to set and/or reschedule deadlines and suspend the processing of an appeal).”
Spiers (D. Utah 2026).
“On March 4, 2024, the ALJ suspended Spiers’ MSPB mixed-case pursuant to 5 C.F.R. § 1201.28 (d) because the parties requested that the matter be referred to the MSPB’s Mediation Appeals Program.”
Jennifer B. Whitaker v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs. (MSPB 2015).
“IAF, 6 Tab 7 at 1; see 5 C.F.R. § 1201.28 (d). In addition, the appellant was represented by experienced counsel, who agreed that the agency’s response to her discovery requests would be due 20 days after the mediation, if the mediation did not resolve her appeal.”
Frank J. Maino v. Dep't of the Treasury (MSPB 2015).
“IAF, Tabs 33-34; see 5 C.F.R. § 1201.28 . After back and forth pleadings regarding the agency’s progress, the administrative judge found that the agency demonstrated that it had completely rescinded the suspension and had returned the appellant to the status quo ante.”
— 5 C.F.R. § 1201.28(a) — 1 case
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.