Lawrence E. Mattison v. Department of Veterans Affairs

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
LAWRENCE E. MATTISON,
Petitioner
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Respondent
______________________
2024-1982
______________________
Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection
Board in No. DC-0752-16-0350-B-1.
______________________
PER C URIAM.
O R D E R
In response to this court’s August 26, 2024 order direct-
ing the parties to show cause, the Department of Veterans
Affairs (“DVA”) urges transfer while Lawrence E. Mattison
argues in favor of this court’s jurisdiction.
In February 2016, the DVA terminated Mr. Mattison,
and he appealed his removal to the Merit Systems Protec-
tion Board alleging, inter alia, discrimination on the basis
of gender and race. The Board affirmed. Mr. Mattison then
filed this petition seeking review of that decision.
Case: 24-1982 Document: 22 Page: 1 Filed: 12/11/2024

-- 1 of 3 --

MATTISON v. DVA 2
Mr. Mattison indicates that he now wishes to abandon
his claims of discrimination and proceed before this court.
ECF No. 20.1 However, he previously filed a complaint in
the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Virginia against the Secretary of Veterans Affairs alleging
wrongful termination based on “race/sex” discrimination.
See Mattison v. Wilkie, No. 4:19-cv-00018, Dkt. No. 3 at ¶ 2
(E.D. Va. Mar. 12, 2019) (emphasis omitted). The district
court dismissed that complaint for failure to state a claim,
finding, as relevant here, that Mr. Mattison “fail[ed] to al-
lege facts sufficient to establish plausible claims of race or
sex discrimination under Title VII or [42 U.S.C.] § 1981.”
Mattison v. Wilkie, No. 4:19-cv-00018, 2020 WL 13691771,
at *5 (E.D. Va. Feb. 10. 2020). Mr. Mattison appealed the
dismissal to the United States Court of Appeals for the
Fourth Circuit, which affirmed.
Federal district courts, not this court, have jurisdiction
over “[c]ases of discrimination subject to the provisions of
[5 U.S.C. §] 7702,” 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2), which involve an
allegation of an action appealable to the Board and an al-
legation that a basis for the action was covered discrimina-
tion, 5 U.S.C. § 7702. Perry v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 582 U.S.
420, 437 (2017). A petitioner does not bring a “[c]ase[] of
discrimination” when he has abandoned his discrimination
claims, Harris v. SEC, 972 F.3d 1307, 1318 (Fed. Cir.
2020), however “Congress did not direct or contemplate bi-
furcated review” by this court of the personnel action and
by the district court of discrimination claims raised before
the Board, Williams v. Dep’t of the Army, 715 F.2d 1485,
1490 (Fed. Cir. 1983); see Punch v. Bridenstine, 945 F.3d
322, 330 (5th Cir. 2019) (“When federal employees have
1 The court understands ECF No. 20 to supersede
the earlier-filed corrected versions of Mr. Mattison’s State-
ment Concerning Discrimination (ECF Nos. 16-2 and 17-2)
such that no action is taken on those earlier versions.
Case: 24-1982 Document: 22 Page: 2 Filed: 12/11/2024

-- 2 of 3 --

MATTISON v. DVA 3
discrimination and non-discrimination claims arising from
‘the same or related facts,’ every court of appeals to con-
sider the question has prohibited bifurcation.”).
Under the present circumstances, because this court’s
review would result in that prohibited bifurcation, we
agree with the DVA that this case belongs in district court
for that court to adjudicate Mr. Mattison’s challenge to the
Board’s final decision. We therefore transfer to the Eastern
District of Virginia. See 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
Accordingly,
IT IS O RDERED THAT:
This matter and all case filings are transferred to the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Vir-
ginia pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
December 11, 2024
Date
FOR THE C OURT
Case: 24-1982 Document: 22 Page: 3 Filed: 12/11/2024

-- 3 of 3 --