NOTE: Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47.6, this disposition
is not citable as precedent. It is a public record.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
04-3234
JOSE A. RAGUINE,
Petitioner,
v.
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT,
Respondent.
___________________________
DECIDED: December 8, 2004
___________________________
Before SCHALL, BRYSON, and DYK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
DECISION
Jose A. Raguine appeals from an order of the Merit Systems Protection Board in
Docket No. SE0831030231-I-1, upholding the decision of the Office of Personnel
Management (“OPM”), denying his request for a retirement annuity. We affirm.
BACKGROUND
Mr. Raguine worked for the Department of the Navy at the Navy’s Subic Bay
Naval Base in the Philippines until he retired in 1992. Mr. Raguine subsequently
applied for an annuity, which OPM denied on December 9, 1993. On August 18, 1999,
Mr. Raguine again applied for an annuity. OPM rejected that application, noting that it
had already denied his request for an annuity six years earlier. Three and a half years
later, Mr. Raguine submitted a request for reconsideration of that decision. The request
for reconsideration was postmarked on January 8, 2003. OPM denied the request for
reconsideration based on lack of timeliness, and Mr. Raguine appealed to the Board.
On appeal to the Board, Mr. Raguine claimed that circumstances beyond his control—a
prolonged illness and indigence—prevented him from filing a timely reconsideration
request.
Mr. Raguine did not request a hearing, and the administrative judge decided the
appeal on the written record. Mr. Raguine proffered several statements relating to his
medical and financial condition and copies of medical reports as evidence of his illness
and indigence. The administrative judge, however, found that that the medical
documents did not identify the time period during which Mr. Raguine suffered from his
infirmities. More importantly, the administrative judge found that Mr. Raguine had failed
to explain why his medical and financial conditions prevented him from filing a timely
request for reconsideration. The administrative judge noted that Mr. Raguine’s
infirmities and indigence did not prevent him from filing a second application for annuity
benefits in 1999 or filing an appeal with the Board. The administrative judge therefore
affirmed OPM’s dismissal of Mr. Raguine’s reconsideration request. The full Board
subsequently denied Mr. Raguine’s petition for review.
DISCUSSION
In his petition for review by this court, Mr. Raguine does not explain how his
financial and medical conditions prevented him from filing a request for reconsideration
04-3234 2
for nine years after his first application for an annuity was denied and for three years
after the denial of his second application. He merely states that the Board “failed to
consider[ ] my presented facts and reasons why my case was untimely filed.” However,
it is clear that the Board considered all the facts and arguments that Mr. Raguine
actually presented. Because substantial evidence supports the Board’s finding that Mr.
Raguine had not shown any justification for the untimeliness of his request for
reconsideration, we affirm the decision of the Board.
04-3234 3