EEOC Appeal 2020000152

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Wilma R.,1
Complainant,
v.
Louis DeJoy,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Capital Metro Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 2020000152
Hearing No. 430-2017-00425X
Agency No. 4K-280-0014-17
DECISION
Complainant filed an appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission), pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(a), from the Agency’s July 18, 2019, final order
concerning 	her 	equal 	employment 	opportunity 	(EEO) 	complaint 	alleging 	employment
discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended,
42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. For the following reasons, the Commission AFFIRMS the Agency’s
final order.
BACKGROUND
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a Rural Carrier,
Grade 00, Tour 2, at the Agency’s Rocky Point Post Office facility in Rocky Point, North
Carolina.
On February 9, 2017, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency subjected
her to a hostile work environment on the bases of race (African-American) and reprisal (filing
the instant complaint) when:
1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant’s name
when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission’s website.

2020000152	2
1. 	On October 25, 2016, October 28, 2016, October 31, 2016, and date(s) to be
provided, she was singled out and spoken to in a threatening or demeaning
manner;
2. 	On December 7, 2016, she was subjected to a 4.5-hour accident investigation;
3. 	On or about December 8, 2016, after her treating physician indicated she was
unable to work, the Postmaster instructed her to report for duty; and
4. 	On or about February 3, 2017, she was issued a Letter of Warning.
At the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the
report of investigation and notice of her right to request a hearing before an Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission Administrative Judge (AJ). 	Complainant requested a hearing. 	When
the Complainant did not file a response, the AJ assigned to the case granted the Agency’s June
22, 2018, motion for a decision without a hearing and issued a decision without a hearing on July
9, 2019.2 	The Agency subsequently issued a final order adopting the AJ’s finding that
Complainant failed to prove that the Agency subjected her to discrimination as alleged.
Complainant filed the instant appeal.3
The Commission's regulations allow an AJ to grant summary judgment when he or she finds that
there is no genuine issue of material fact. 	29 C.F.R. § 1614.109(g). 	An issue of fact is
“genuine” if the evidence is such that a reasonable fact finder could find in favor of the non-
moving party. Celotex v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986); Oliver v. Digital Equip. Corp.,
846 F.2d 103, 105 (1st Cir. 1988). 	A fact is “material” if it has the potential to affect the
outcome of the case. In rendering this appellate decision, we must scrutinize the AJ’s legal and
factual conclusions, and the Agency’s final order adopting them, de novo. 	See 29 C.F.R. §
1614.405(a)(stating that a “decision on an appeal from an Agency’s final action shall be based on
a de novo review…”); see also Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29
C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO-MD-110), at Chap. 9, § VI.B. (as revised, August 5, 2015)(providing that
an administrative judge’s determination to issue a decision without a hearing, and the decision
itself, will both be reviewed de novo).
In order to successfully oppose a decision by summary judgment, a complainant must identify,
with specificity, facts in dispute either within the record or by producing further supporting
evidence and must further establish that such facts are material under applicable law. Such a
dispute would indicate that a hearing is necessary to produce evidence to support a finding that
the agency was motivated by discriminatory animus. Here, however, Complainant has failed to
establish such a dispute. Even construing any inferences raised by the undisputed facts in favor
of Complainant, a reasonable fact-finder could not find in Complainant’s favor.
2 While the AJ originally issued a decision without a hearing on July 8, 2019, he decided to re-
issue his decision the following day to reflect the correct EEOC Hearing Number in the case
caption of the Order.
3 The Agency dismissed a portion of the complaint for failure to state a claim (regarding the
Office of Workers’ Compensation). Complainant has not challenged the dismissal of this claim
on appeal and, therefore, we shall not address this claim.

2020000152	3
Upon careful review of the AJ’s decision and the evidence of record, as well as the parties’
arguments on appeal, we conclude that the AJ correctly determined that the preponderance of the
evidence did not establish that Complainant was discriminated against or subjected to a hostile
work environment by the Agency as alleged.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency’s final order.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0617)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this case if the Complainant or
the Agency submits a written request containing arguments or evidence which tend to establish
that:
1. 	The appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact
or law; or
2. 	The appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or
operations of the Agency.
Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, must be filed with the Office of
Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision. A party
shall have twenty (20) 	calendar days of 	receipt of 	another 	party’s timely request 	for
reconsideration in which to submit a brief or statement in opposition. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405;
Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110),
at Chap. 9 § VII.B (Aug. 5, 2015). 	All requests and arguments must be submitted to the
Director, 	Office 	of 	Federal 	Operations, 	Equal 	Employment 	Opportunity 	Commission.
Complainant’s request may be submitted via regular mail to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC
20013, or by certified mail to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. In the absence of a
legible postmark, the request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by mail
within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604. The
agency’s request must be submitted in digital format via the EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal
(FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). The request or opposition must also include proof of
service on the other party. Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of
your request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented
the timely filing of the request. 	Any supporting documentation must be submitted with
your 	request 	for 	reconsideration. 	The 	Commission 	will 	consider 	requests 	for
reconsideration filed after the deadline only in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R.
§ 1614.604(c).

2020000152	4
COMPLAINANT’S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0610)
You have the right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District Court within
ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive this decision. If you file a civil action,
you must name as the defendant in the complaint the person who is the official Agency head or
department head, identifying that person by his or her full name and official title. Failure to do
so may result in the dismissal of your case in court. 	“Agency” or “department” means the
national organization, and not the local office, facility or department in which you work. If you
file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil action will terminate the
administrative processing of your complaint.
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0815)
If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may
request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or
costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may
request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of
court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The
court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter
the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant’s Right to
File a Civil Action for the specific time limits).
FOR THE COMMISSION:
______________________________ 	Carlton M. Hadden’s signature
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
September 23, 2020
Date