The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
25-1278•Brian Richards v. Merit Systems Protection Board
25-1278Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitMar 18, 2025
N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
BRIAN RICHARDS,
Petitioner
v.
MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD,
Respondent
______________________
2025-1278
______________________
Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection
Board in No. SF-315H-21-0326-I-1.
______________________
Before D YK, P ROST , and CHEN, Circuit Judges.
P ER CURIAM .
O R D E R
Brian Richards appealed his termination to the Merits
System Protection Board and alleged discrimination based
on disability and retaliation for Equal Employment Oppor-
tunity activities. The court directed the parties to show
cause, and both the Merit Systems Protection Board and
Mr. Richards agree that this court lacks jurisdiction.
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
Case: 25-1278 Document: 13 Page: 1 Filed: 03/18/2025
-- 1 of 2 --
RICHARDS v. MSPB 2
allegation of an action appealable to the Board and an al-
legation that a basis for the action was covered discrimina-
tion, § 7702. Perry v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 582 U.S. 420,
437 (2017). Here, Mr. Richards appealed his termination
to the Board and alleged that a basis for that action was
discrimination. Therefore, we agree with the parties that
this court lacks jurisdiction.
We agree with Mr. Richards that transfer to the United
States District Court for the Southern District of California
is appropriate. 28 U.S.C. § 1631; see § 7703(b)(2) (citing 42
U.S.C. § 2000-e-16(c)); 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3) (permit-
ting an action to be brought “in any judicial district in the
State in which the unlawful employment practice is alleged
to have been committed”).
Accordingly,
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
This matter and all case filings are transferred to the
United States District Court for the Southern District of
California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
March 18, 2025
Date
F OR THE COURT
Case: 25-1278 Document: 13 Page: 2 Filed: 03/18/2025
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.