Quintanilla v. Myriad RBM, Inc. (Board decision, April 30, 2015)

Plain-English summary

Quintanilla asked the Administrative Review Board to review an administrative law judge's decision in an Immigration and Nationality Act case against Myriad RBM. Before the Board decided the appeal, the parties told it they had reached a settlement. They jointly requested dismissal with prejudice. The Board granted that motion and closed the matter without discussing the claim's merits. The order does not state a settlement amount or describe the agreement's terms.

Decision snapshot

• Cited authorities: Immigration and Nationality Act H-1B provisions, including 8 U.S.C. § 1182(n); general Board finality under 29 C.F.R. § 26.1(b).
• Outcome: Joint dismissal motion granted after settlement; matter dismissed with prejudice.
• Key point: The Board closed the appeal based on the parties' settlement request without a merits ruling or published settlement terms.

Full text (DOL official public release)

U.S. Department of Labor
Administrative Review Board
200 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20210

In the Matter of:

VINCENTE CARLOS QUINTANILLA,
ARB CASE NO. 15-039

PROSECUTING PARTY,
ALJ CASE NO. 2014-LCA-011

v. DATE: April 30, 2015

MYRIAD RBM, INC. d/b/a/ RULES BASED MEDICINE,

RESPONDENT.

BEFORE: THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD

Appearances:

For the Complainant:
Vicente Carlos Quintanilla, pro se, Richmond, Virginia

For the Respondent:
Richard M. Marsh, Esq.; Myriad RBM, Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah

Before: Paul M. Igasaki, Chief Administrative Appeals Judge and Joanne Royce, Administrative Appeals Judge

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

The Administrative Review Board received a petition for review on March 13, 2015, from the Prosecuting Party, Vicente Carlos Quintanilla, requesting the Board to review a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order in this

USDOL/OALJ REPORTER
PAGE 1
case arising under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended. 1 On April 28, 2015, the Board received the parties’ Joint Motion for Dismissal with Prejudice, informing the Board that the parties had reached a settlement in the case.

Accordingly, given that the parties have entered into a settlement resolving the case on appeal to the Board and have requested that this matter be dismissed with prejudice, we GRANT the parties’ Motion and DISMISS this matter with prejudice.

SO ORDERED.

PAUL M. IGASAKI
Chief Administrative Appeals Judge

JOANNE ROYCE
Administrative Appeals Judge

1
8 U.S.C.A §§ 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), 1182(n), 1184(c) (Thomson/West 2005) (INA).

USDOL/OALJ REPORTER
PAGE 2