CAMPBELL v. MSPB , No. 13-3166 (Fed. Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on January 8, 2014.
Download PDF
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ ELMER E. CAMPBELL, JR., Petitioner, v. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, Respondent, AND UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Intervenor. ______________________ 2013-3166 ______________________ Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board in No. SF0752100331-M-1. ______________________ ORDER ______________________ Before NEWMAN, LOURIE, and DYK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. Mr. Elmer E. Campbell has taken an appeal from the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board (“Board”). Campbell v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., Appeal No. 13-3166 (Oct. 2 CAMPBELL v. MSPB 9, 2013), ECF No. 12. Mr. Campbell’s brief states that his union “filed a grievance on the identical issues raised before the MSPB on November 12, 2009,” and that “USPS settled these issues, and issued a Regular Regional Pre[A]rbitration Settlement with back pay for the period November 12, 2009 to March 2, 2012.” Pet’r Br. at 2. The Board in its brief states that this settlement “may provide full relief to Mr. Campbell as it relates to this matter[.]” Resp’t Br. at 10 n.2. The United States Postal Service (“USPS”), as Intervenor, provides a copy of the settlement agreement. No party has moved for or otherwise requested, dismissal of this appeal. However, “A case becomes moot— and therefore no longer a “Case or Controversy” for purposes of Article III—when the issues presented are no longer ‘live’ or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.” Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc., 133 S. Ct. 721, 726–27 (2013) (citations omitted). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: Mr. Campbell is directed to show cause, within 14 days of the date of receipt of this order, why this petition should not be dismissed as moot. The Board and USPS are also directed to respond within that time. FOR THE COURT November 20, 2014 Date cc: Nicholas Jabbour Lindsey Schreckengost /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
