Budri v. FirstFleet, Inc. (agency decision, August 19, 2019)

Plain-English summary

The Board had vacated its March 2019 decision in Adriano Budri's Surface Transportation Assistance Act case because Budri filed a federal district-court action first. FirstFleet sought reconsideration, arguing that the district court lacked jurisdiction until Budri filed a final amended complaint in June 2019, after the Board's decision. The Board relied on the February 19, 2019 filing date of the original district-court complaint and noted that the court had not dismissed the case. Because that filing preceded the Board's purported final decision, the Board refused to reconsider its jurisdictional ruling. Its order vacating the decision and dismissing the administrative complaint remained in effect.

Decision snapshot

• Cited authorities: 49 U.S.C. § 31105(c); 29 C.F.R. § 1978.114(a)
• Outcome: Reconsideration denied; prior vacatur and dismissal remained in effect.
• Key point: The original district-court filing date controlled whether the Board retained jurisdiction, not the date of a later amended complaint.

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:


  ADRIANO BUDRI,                                        ARB CASE NO. 2018-0055

                  COMPLAINANT,                          ALJ CASE NO. 2018-STA-00033

         v.                                             DATE: August 19, 2019

  FIRSTFLEET, INC.,

                  RESPONDENT.

  Appearances:

  For the Complainant:
        Adriano K. Budri; pro se; Burleson, Texas

  For the Respondent:
        C. Eric Stevens, Esq.; Littler Mendelson, PC; Nashville, Tennessee; and
        Greg McAllister, Esq.; Littler Mendelson, PC; Dallas, Texas

  Before: William T. Barto, Chief Administrative Appeals Judge; James A.
  Haynes and Daniel T. Gresh, Administrative Appeals Judges


                             ORDER DENYING RELIEF

        PER CURIAM: On July 30, 2019, we vacated our Final Decision and Order in
  this matter and dismissed the complaint. The basis for our action was that we
  lacked jurisdiction to issue the Final Decision and Order on March 25, 2019, in light
  of Complainant Budri’s action for de novo review filed in a United States district





  court on February 19, 2019. 1 On August 5, 2019, Respondent filed a motion
  requesting that we reconsider our action, contending in sum that the district court
  lacked jurisdiction over this matter until Complainant had filed with the court his
  Final Amended Complaint on June 8, 2019. As that date was subsequent to our
  Final Decision and Order, Respondent argues that our order should remain in
  effect. Complainant disagrees and points to the date of his original filing in district
  court, more than 30 days before our Decision and Order.

         After reviewing the matters submitted by the parties, we renew our official
  notice that Complainant Budri filed his original complaint on February 19, 2019, in
  the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Dallas), Budri
  v. FirstFleet, Inc., Case No. 3:19-cv-00409-N-BH, and the district court has not
  dismissed that case. As that filing date was in advance of our putative Final
  Decision and Order in this matter, we decline to reconsider our action vacating that
  Decision and Order and dismissing the instant complaint.

         SO ORDERED.




  Note: Questions regarding any case pending before the Board should be directed to
  the Board’s staff. Telephone: (202) 693-6200, Facsimile: (202) 693-6220




  1      49 U.S.C. § 31105(c); 29 C.F.R. § 1978.114(a) (“If there is no final order of the
  Secretary, 210 days have passed since the filing of the complaint, and there is no showing
  that there has been delay due to the bad faith of the complainant, the complainant may bring
  an action at law or equity for de novo review in the appropriate district court of the United
  States, which will have jurisdiction over such an action without regard to the amount in
  controversy.”).