U.S. Code » Title 5 » Part PART II— CIVIL SERVICE FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES › Chapter CHAPTER 12— MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL, AND EMPLOYEE RIGHT OF ACTION › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

5 U.S.C. § 1206

Annual report

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar

The Board shall submit an annual report to the President and the Congress on its activities, which shall include a description of significant actions taken by the Board to carry out its functions under this title. The report shall also review the significant actions of the Office of Personnel Management, including an analysis of whether the actions of the Office of Personnel Management are in accord with merit system principles and free from prohibited personnel practices.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 87 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2022 · leading case: Celia A. Wren v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 681 F.2d 867 (D.C. Cir. 1982).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Celia A. Wren v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 681 F.2d 867 (D.C. Cir. 1982). · cites it 8× “After petitioner’s appeal to the Board had been dismissed, the OSC refused to exercise 5 U.S.C. § 1206 authority to investigate petitioner’s allegation, finding that it was more appropriately resolved “under an administrative appeals procedure or applicable grievance procedure.”
Jeffrey A. Saul v. United States of Am. Ray Larsen Colleen St. Louis John Doe St. Louis, 928 F.2d 829 (9th Cir. 1991). · cites it 4× “CSRA § 202(a) (formerly 5 U.S.C. § 1206 (a)(1)), repealed in part by Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 § 3(a)(8), Pub.”
Joseph Feit v. John Ward & Eugene Grapa, 886 F.2d 848 (7th Cir. 1989). · cites it 6× “” See 5 U.S.C. §§ 1206 and 2302(a)(2)(B). It is beyond dispute that the term “prohibited personnel practice” encompasses violations of a federal employee’s constitutional rights.”
Phyllis F. Borrell v. United States Int'l Commc'ns Agency, 682 F.2d 981 (D.C. Cir. 1982). · cites it 6× “On December 19, 1979, Borrell petitioned the Office of Special Counsel (“OSC”) of the Merit Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”) to investigate her discharge pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 1206 (a), contending that it was in reprisal for whistleblowing — a prohibited personnel practice…”
Linda H. Broadway v. John R. Block, Sec'y of Agric., 694 F.2d 979 (5th Cir. 1982). · cites it 4× “5 U.S.C. § 1206 (a)-(c). He is also required to investigate any allegation concerning “activities prohibited by any civil service law, rule, or regulation .”
Frank K. Kotarski v. V.L. Cooper, A.E. Navarro, W.J. Tinston, J.H. Kirkpatrick, Naval Air Rework Facility, Capt. P.A. Monroe, in His Off. Capacity, 799 F.2d 1342 (9th Cir. 1986). · cites it 4× “” 5 U.S.C. § 1206 (a)(1). The definition of “prohibited personnel practice” includes reprisal against a “whistleblower” as well as discrimination against an employee or applicant for employment on the basis of conduct which does not adversely affect performance of the job.”
Joseph C. Spagnola, Jr. v. William Mathis, (Two Cases) Joseph C. Spagnola, Jr. v. William Mathis, 809 F.2d 16 (D.C. Cir. 1987). · cites it 2× “5 U.S.C. § 1206 (1982). The OSC’s decision not to prosecute Spagnola’s constitutional claims is unreviewable either within the agency or by the federal courts.”
Parkinson v. Dep't of Just., 815 F.3d 757 (Fed. Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “Those provisions replaced the former 5 U.S.C. § 1206 , which now provides for certain annual reports.”
Mary Rivera Dennis Rivera v. United States, 924 F.2d 948 (9th Cir. 1991). · cites it 2× “5 U.S.C. § 1206 (1988). When the OSC’s investigation reveals “reasonable grounds to believe that a prohibited personnel practice has occurred,” the OSC must report it to the agency involved and to the Merit Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”).”
Louis A. Carducci v. Donald T. Regan, Sec'y, U.S. Treasury Dep't, 714 F.2d 171 (D.C. Cir. 1983). “V 1981), see 5 U.S.C. § 1206 (Supp. V 1981), the present case does not fall within the remedial scheme of the Act and therefore judicial relief is not precluded.”
Roland A. Leblanc v. United States, 50 F.3d 1025 (Fed. Cir. 1995). “See 5 U.S.C. § 1206 , repealed by Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989, Pub.”
Gonzalez v. Otero, 172 F. Supp. 3d 477 (D.P.R. 2016). · cites it 2× “of any law, rule, or regulation, gross mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety. See 5 U.S.C.”
Show all 87 citing cases →
— 5 U.S.C. § 1206(e) — 1 case
Auth. of the Special Couns., Merit Sys. ProtectionBoard, Over Anonymous Allegations of Wrongdoing (OLC 1981).
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.