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)
25-1728•Jaime Melendez v. Merit Systems Protection Board
25-1728Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitSep 12, 2025
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
JAIME MELENDEZ,
Petitioner
v.
MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD,
Respondent
______________________
2025-1728
______________________
Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection
Board in No. SF-0752-24-0246-I-1.
______________________
ON MOTION
______________________
Before REYNA, HUGHES, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
O R D E R
Jaime Melendez appealed to the Merit Systems Protec-
tion Board asserting his resignation was involuntary and
alleging, among other things, disability discrimination. Af-
ter the Board dismissed his appeal, he filed this petition
seeking review of the Board’s decision as well as review of
a related action before the EEOC. In response to the
Case: 25-1728 Document: 14 Page: 1 Filed: 09/12/2025
-- 1 of 2 --
MELENDEZ v. MSPB 2
court’s show cause order, Mr. Melendez confirms that he
wishes to continue to pursue his discrimination claims and
requests transfer to the United States District Court for
the Central District of California. The Board agrees that
transfer to the Central District of California is appropriate
without taking a position on the EEOC action.
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), and also over civil
actions seeking judicial review of an EEOC decision, see 42
U.S.C. § 2000e-16(c); 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Under the circum-
stances, we transfer to the United States District Court for
the Central District of California, where the alleged em-
ployment action occurred. See 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
This matter and all case motions and filings are trans-
ferred to the United States District Court for the Central
District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.
September 12, 2025
Date
FOR THE COURT
Case: 25-1728 Document: 14 Page: 2 Filed: 09/12/2025
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.