In Re MARTIN AKERMAN v. Werner & Pfleiderer Corp., 710 F.2d 1561, 1565 Fed. Cir. 1983 . Although our…

N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
In Re MARTIN AKERMAN
Petitioner
______________________
2024-146
______________________
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the Merit Sys-
tems Protection Board in No. DC-0752-22-0376-I-1.
______________________
ON PETITION
______________________
P ER CURIAM .
O R D E R
Martin Akerman petitions for a writ of mandamus to
compel the Merit Systems Protection Board to take certain
action in his Board appeal, No. DC-0752-22-0376-I-1, in
which he purportedly raises “claims of due process viola-
tions, discrimination, and retaliation.” Pet. at 3.
The All Writs Act authorizes courts to issue writs “nec-
essary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdic-
tions.” 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). Because “[t]he All Writs Act is
not an independent basis of jurisdiction, . . . the petitioner
must initially show that the action sought to be corrected
by mandamus is within this court’s statutorily defined
Case: 24-146 Document: 18 Page: 1 Filed: 10/24/2024

-- 1 of 2 --

IN RE AKERMAN 2
subject matter jurisdiction.” Baker Perkins, Inc. v. Werner
& Pfleiderer Corp., 710 F.2d 1561, 1565 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
Although our jurisdiction includes authority to review
certain final decisions of the Board, it does not include au-
thority to review “[c]ases of discrimination subject to the
provisions of [5 U.S.C. §] 7702,” § 7703(b)(2)—cases involv-
ing allegations that an action appealable to the Board was
based on covered discrimination, § 7702. Perry v. Merit
Sys. Prot. Bd., 582 U.S. 420, 437 (2017). Mr. Akerman as-
serts this is such a “mixed case[].” Pet. at 6. Because this
court would not have jurisdiction over a petition for review
from the underlying Board appeal here, we likewise lack
jurisdiction to consider his petition for mandamus.
Accordingly,
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
(1) The petition for a writ of mandamus is dismissed.
(2) All remaining motions are denied.
October 24, 2024
Date
F OR THE COURT
Case: 24-146 Document: 18 Page: 2 Filed: 10/24/2024

-- 2 of 2 --