Boyd v. DVA

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ THASHA A. BOYD, Petitioner v. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent ______________________ 2018-1459 ______________________ Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in No. AT-0752-17-0412-I-1. ______________________ Decided: July 2, 2018 ______________________ THASHA A. BOYD, Kennesaw, GA, pro se. LAUREN MOORE, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washing- ton, DC, for respondent. Also represented by CHAD A. READLER, ROBERT E. KIRSCHMAN, JR., STEVEN J. GILLINGHAM. ______________________ Before REYNA, BRYSON, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges. 2 BOYD v. DVA PER CURIAM. This petition for review relates to a decision by the Merit Systems Protection Board to remove Thasha A. Boyd from federal service after being charged with inap- propriate conduct toward a co-worker and failure to follow her supervisor’s instructions. For the reasons explained below, we affirm. BACKGROUND Thasha A. Boyd (“Ms. Boyd”) was employed as a Vet- erans Service Representative as a probationary employee at the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (“DVA”) Veterans Benefits Administration’s Atlanta Regional Office. Prior to her employment with the DVA, Ms. Boyd was employed at the Department of Labor (“DOL”) as an Immigration Program Analyst from May 3, 2010 to April 4, 2011. Subsequent to her departure from DOL and prior to her employment with the DVA, Ms. Boyd worked at the Internal Revenue Service. On December 7, 2016, an employee of the Disabled American Veterans (“DAV”), Matthew Jahn (“Mr. Jahn”), filed a complaint alleging that Ms. Boyd had been making sexual advances towards him. Mr. Jahn’s complaint stated that he had informed Ms. Boyd that he was in a relationship, but that Ms. Boyd “continue[d] to harass [him],” and that “she has started to touch my leg, back, and tries to kiss my neck.” Appx51. 1 According to Mr. Jahn, Ms. Boyd also asked him whether “when [he] got home, if [he] was going to think about [having sex with] her.” Id. On December 12, 2016, Ms. Boyd’s supervisor, Chan- tal Wynter (“Ms. Wynter”), issued a Stay Away Notifica- 1 All citations to “Appx” herein refer to the Separate Appendix for Respondent. BOYD v. DVA 3 tion (“SAN”) to Ms. Boyd. The SAN stated that “[e]ffective immediately, and until further notice, you are instructed to have absolutely no contact or (writ- ten/verbal) communication with Matthew Jahn, DAV Representative. Violation of these instructions may result in disciplinary or adverse action being taken against you.” Appx53. The SAN also stated that if Ms. Boyd had a business need to contact Mr. Jahn, she should consult with Ms. Wynter or a “designated management official at the Veterans Service Center so that appropriate contact can be arranged.” Id. On December 13, 2016, Mr. Jahn reported that he ar- rived at work to discover a letter and a drink on his desk. He maintained that both were from Ms. Boyd. Later that same day, Ms. Boyd attempted to make contact with Mr. Jahn while he was outside walking on the DVA campus after ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals