Background
Jorge L. Alvarez worked for the U.S. Postal Service from late 2014 until his resignation on February 7, 2018. He later sought disability-retirement benefits under the Federal Employees’ Retirement System based on post-traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, esophageal spasms, asthma, and severe allergies. The Office of Personnel Management denied his application and, on reconsideration, again concluded that he was not entitled to benefits.
An administrative judge affirmed OPM’s decision, finding no persuasive evidence that Alvarez became disabled while employed in a FERS-covered position. The Merit Systems Protection Board denied review and affirmed, agreeing that medical evidence from around the time of his resignation was more reliable than later documentation and testimony. Alvarez sought judicial review in federal district court, which transferred the case to the Federal Circuit because the matter did not involve a discrimination claim presented to the Board.
The Court’s Holding
The Federal Circuit held that it had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(9). Alvarez’s disability-retirement claim was not a “mixed case” because he had not alleged before the Board that OPM denied his application on discriminatory grounds. His later reference to discrimination in his appellate brief did not transform the appeal into a mixed case.
On the merits, the court affirmed the Board. It declined to consider an alleged investigation that Alvarez had not presented to OPM or the Board, and it found substantial evidence supporting the determination that he had not established disability while employed. The court also explained that 5 U.S.C. § 8461(d) bars judicial review of the factual underpinnings of OPM’s physical-disability determinations. Finally, it denied Alvarez’s request for appointed counsel because civil litigants generally have no right to counsel absent a potential loss of personal freedom.
Key Takeaways
- A FERS disability-retirement appeal is not a mixed case merely because the petitioner mentions discrimination on appeal; the challenged agency action must have been alleged to involve unlawful discrimination.
- The Federal Circuit generally will not consider evidence or arguments that were not presented to OPM or the MSPB.
- Judicial review of disability-retirement decisions is limited, and the court cannot revisit the factual basis of OPM’s physical-disability determinations.
Why It Matters
The nonprecedential decision illustrates the narrow scope of Federal Circuit review in federal disability-retirement cases. Applicants must build their evidentiary record before OPM and the MSPB and identify any discrimination theory during the administrative proceedings rather than raising it for the first time on judicial review.