Ulrich v. Merit Systems Protection Board

NOTE: This order is n0npreceder1tial. United States Cou11 of AppeaIs for the FederaI Circuit BRIAN E. ULRICH, MICHAEL E. JONES, JOHN B. RUBINSKY, JOHN A DUKES, JR., JOHN EVANGELISTA AND GERALD W'IMBERLY, Petitioners, V. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, Respondent, AND __ UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Interven0r. 2012-3035 Petiti0n for review of the Merit SyStems Pr0tecti0n B0ard in consolidated case 110s. PHO752100649-I-1, PH0351110034-I-1, PH0351110035-I-1, PHO'752110036-I- 1, PH0752110037-I-1, and SF07521l0079-I-1. ON MOTION ORDER ULRICH V. MSPB 2 The United States Posta1 Service (USPS) moves without opposition to reform the caption to name the Merit Systems Protection Board as respondent and the USPS as intervenor. USPS also moves without opposition to set the briefing schedule. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7703(a)(2), the Board is desig- nated as the respondent when the B0ard's decision con- cerns the procedure or jurisdiction of the Board The employing agency is designated as the respondent when the Board reaches the merits of the underlying case. Here, the Board dismissed these consolidated appeals for lack of jurisdiction Thus, the Board is the proper respondent in this petition for review. - Accordingly, lT lS ORDERED THATZ The motions are granted The revised official caption is reflected above. The Board’s and USPS’s briefs are due within 40 days of the date of service of the petitioners opening brief. FoR THE CoURT 2 5 /s/ J an Horbaly Date J an Horbaly Clerk cc: Dennis L. Friedman, Esq. L. Misha Preheim, Esq. 4 ED J@ff"eY Ga“€e1`» ES‘1- u.s. could APPEA1s ton 821 msssnsmclncun APR 25 2012 .\AN HORBALV CLERK