(a) The hearing will be scheduled not earlier than 15 days after the date of the hearing notice unless the parties agree to an earlier date. The agency, upon request of the judge, must provide appropriate hearing space.
(b) The judge may change the time, date, or place of the hearing, or suspend, adjourn, or continue the hearing. The change will not require the 15-day notice provided in paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) Either party may file a motion for postponement of the hearing. The motion must be made in writing and must either be accompanied by an affidavit or sworn statement under 28 U.S.C. 1746. (See appendix IV.) The affidavit or sworn statement must describe the reasons for the request. The judge will grant the request for postponement only upon a showing of good cause.
(d) The Board has established certain approved hearing locations, which are listed on the Board's public Web site (www.mspb.gov). The judge will advise parties of these hearing sites as appropriate. Parties, for good cause, may file motions requesting a different hearing location. Rulings on those motions will be based on a showing that a different location will be more advantageous to all parties and to the Board.
[54 FR 53504, Dec. 29, 1989, as amended at 77 FR 62366, Oct. 12, 2012]
Notes of Decisions
James W. Johnson v. Dep't of the Treasury, 721 F.2d 361 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
· cites it 2× “, which set out *363 the MSPB’s appellate procedures, 4 and from the Board’s regulations, 5 C.F.R. 1201.51 et seq., promulgated pursuant to the specific authorization in 5 U.”
Koch v. White, 251 F. Supp. 3d 162 (D.D.C. 2017).
“See 5 C.F.R. § 1201.51 (c) (2010); Ex. J at 17-18.”
McCurry v. Dep't of Just., 612 F. App'x 991 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
· cites it 4× “McCurry also alleges that the four days between the date of the Febrúary 21 order and the February 25 hearing did not comply with the requirements of 5 C.F.R. § 1201.51 (2014). McCurry further claims that the Board erred by concluding that it lacked jurisdiction over her…”
Shelly Smith v. Dep't of the Army (MSPB 2023).
“An administrative judge is authorized to postpone a hearing upon a showing of good cause, 5 C.F.R. § 1201.51 (c), and the Board reviews an administrative judge’s decision to deny a postponement request under an abuse of discretion standard, see McCarthy v.”
Kyle Shirley v. Dep't of Just. (MSPB 2024).
“5 C.F.R. §§ 1201.51 (c), 1201.85(a). Here, the appellant does not allege, and the record does not suggest, that he availed himself of such procedures that might have led to Dr.”
John Morrison v. Dep't of the Navy (MSPB 2024).
“546 , ¶ 15 (2000); 5 C.F.R. § 1201.51 (c). 13 On the evening of February 25, 2019, the appellant requested via facsimile a continuance of the video-conference hearing scheduled for February 28, 2019.”
Kwadwo Amoako v. Dep't of Def. (MSPB 2024).
“See 5 C.F.R. §§ 1201.51 (c) (providing that a party may file a motion for postponement of the hearing), 1201.”
Rhee v. Treasury (Fed. Cir. 2025).
“; see also 5 C.F.R. § 1201.51 (c) (stating the requirement that a motion for postponement of the hearing “must be made in writing and must either be accompanied by an affidavit or sworn statement under 28 U.”
Hamdy A. Abou-Hussein v. Dep't of the Navy (MSPB 2014).
“41 (b)(6), and to grant a request for postponement only upon a showing of good cause, 5 C.F.R. § 1201.51 (c). We agree with the administrative judge that the appellant failed to make such a showing 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.