Lamm v. Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad Co. (agency decision, February 20, 2024)

Plain-English summary

Matt Lamm asked the Board to review an administrative judge's denial of his Federal Railroad Safety Act complaint. While the appeal was pending, he filed an original action for de novo review in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana and provided the Board with a file-stamped copy. The Board concluded that the Department of Labor no longer had jurisdiction once the federal action was filed. It dismissed the administrative appeal.

Decision snapshot

• Cited authorities: 49 U.S.C. § 20109(d)(3); 29 C.F.R. § 1982.114(a)
• Outcome: Administrative appeal dismissed after the complainant filed a de novo district-court action.
• Key point: A qualifying FRSA district-court filing ends the Department of Labor's jurisdiction over the same complaint.

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:

MATT LAMM, ARB CASE NO. 2024-0008

        COMPLAINANT,                       ALJ CASE NO. 2021-FRS-00014
                                           CHIEF ALJ STEPHEN R. HENLEY
  v.
                                           DATE: FEBRUARY 20, 2024

INDIANA HARBOR BELT
RAILROAD CO.,

        RESPONDENT.

Before HARTHILL, Chief Administrative Appeals Judge, and THOMPSON, Administrative Appeals Judge

                         ORDER OF DISMISSAL

PER CURIAM:

  This case arises under the employee protection provisions of the Federal

Railroad Safety Act of 1982 (FRSA).1 On December 20, 2023, Complainant Matt Lamm filed a Petition for Review with the Administrative Review Board (Board), requesting review of the Decision and Order Denying Complaint issued by Chief Administrative Law Judge Stephen R. Henley on December 8, 2023.

   On February 9, 2024, Complainant filed a letter with the Board indicating

that he had filed an original action with the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 20109(d)(3). Complainant also filed a file-stamped copy of his district court complaint, dated January 31, 2024, with his letter to the Board.

1
49 U.S.C. § 20109, as implemented by 29 C.F.R. Part 1982 (2023).
 2

 Since Complainant has filed an original action in district court, the

Department of Labor no longer has jurisdiction over his case.2 Accordingly, we DISMISS this appeal.

   SO ORDERED.




                                       _________________________________
                                       SUSAN HARTHILL
                                       Chief Administrative Appeals Judge



                                       _________________________________
                                       ANGELA W. THOMPSON
                                       Administrative Appeals Judge

2
See 49 U.S.C. § 20109(d)(3) (“[I]f the Secretary of Labor has not issued a final
decision within 210 days after the filing of the complaint and if the delay is not due to the bad faith of the employee, the employee may bring an original action at law or equity for de novo review in the appropriate district court of the United States, which shall have jurisdiction over such an action . . . .”); see also 29 C.F.R. § 1982.114(a).