CompFox AI Summary
The applicant sought reconsideration of an order that he claimed was issued January 11, 2016, arguing a Compromise and Release did not settle his serious and willful misconduct claim. The Board dismissed the petition as untimely, noting the applicant filed his petition significantly late. Even if considered timely, the Board would have denied it on the merits, as a prior decision had already approved a Compromise and Release excluding the 132a claim. The Board clarified that while 132a claims are not subject to ADR, serious and willful misconduct claims are.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The applicant sought reconsideration of an order that he claimed was issued January 11, 2016, arguing a Compromise and Release did not settle his serious and willful misconduct claim. The Board dismissed the petition as untimely, noting the applicant filed his petition significantly late. Even if considered timely, the Board would have denied it on the merits, as a prior decision had already approved a Compromise and Release excluding the 132a claim. The Board clarified that while 132a claims are not subject to ADR, serious and willful misconduct claims are.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.