Syed M.a. Hasan v. Secretary of Labor, U.s. Department of Labor

Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter
Citation Limited Pursuant to lst Cir. Loc. R. 32.3
United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 03-1981
SYED M.A. HASAN,
Petitioner,
v.
SECRETARY OF LABOR, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Respondent.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Before
Torruella, Circuit Judge,
Cyr and Stahl, Senior Circuit Judges.
Syed M.A. Hasan, on brief pro se.
Mary J. Rieser, Attorney, Office of the Solicitor, Division of
Fair Labor Standards, Howard M. Radzely, Acting Solicitor of Labor,
Steven J. Mandel, Associate Solicitor and Paul L. Frieden, Counsel
for Appellate Litigation, on brief for respondent.
March 24, 2004

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
Per Curiam. After carefully considering the briefs and
record on appeal, we affirm.
The appellant argues that his complaint should not have
been dismissed because it contained the short, plain statement of
his claim required by Swierkiewicz v. Sorema, 534 U.S. 506
(2002). However, Swierkiewicz is inapposite. First, the
appellant's case was not dismissed solely on the basis of the
allegations of his complaint. Secondly, the Energy
Reorganization Act, unlike the statutes at issue in Swierkiewicz,
includes a gatekeeping restriction. See 42 U.S.C. §
5851(b)(3)(A); 29 C.F.R. § 24.5(b); Trimmer v. Department of
Labor, 174 F.3d 1098 (10th Cir. 1999).
Appellant's argument that he was entitled to additional
discovery is unavailing, as are his remaining arguments. The
requested discovery would not have tended to rectify the defect
in his case.
Affirmed. Loc. R. 27(c).

-- 2 of 2 --