Stolarik v. National Express, LLC (agency decision, January 7, 2021)

Plain-English summary

The Board ordered Jason Stolarik to explain why his appeal should not be dismissed for failing to identify the respondent and its counsel and provide proof of service. He did not respond by the deadline or before the Board issued this order. The Board relied on its authority to manage its docket and sanction failures to comply with its orders and briefing requirements. It dismissed the case.

Decision snapshot

• Cited authorities: The Board's inherent docket-management authority.
• Outcome: Case dismissed for failure to respond to a show-cause order.
• Key point: An appeal may be dismissed when the appellant does not comply with an order to identify the opposing party and prove service.

Full text (DOL official public release)

U.S. Department of Labor Administrative Review Board
200 Constitution Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20210-0001

IN THE MATTER OF:

JASON STOLARIK, ARB CASE NO. 2021-0011

           COMPLAINANT,                         ALJ CASE NOS. 2020-SOX-00036
                                                              2020-STA-00089
    v.
                                                DATE: January 7, 2021

NATIONAL EXPRESS, LLC
DBA DURHAM SCHOOL
SERVICE LLC,

           RESPONDENT.



                     ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT


     By Order dated December 9, 2020, the Administrative Review Board (Board)

ordered Complainant to show cause no later than December 23, 2020, explaining why his appeal should not be dismissed for failing to identify Respondent and its counsel and show proof of service. As of the date of this Order, Complainant has failed to respond.

    The Board’s authority to effectively manage its docket, including authority to

require compliance with the Board orders, is necessary to “achieve orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.”1 This Board has authority to issue sanctions,

1
McCray v. Automotive Component Carrier, LLC, ARB No. 2016-0050, ALJ No. 2011-STA-
00053 (ARB Aug. 4, 2016); see also Link v. Wabash, 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962). 2

including dismissal, for a party’s failure to comply with the Board’s orders and briefing requirements.² Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED.

FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD:

[illegible]
Aubrey Gordon
General Counsel

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

² Id.