Ezel / Agency Decisions / WEST 92-665-DM

Newmont Gold Company (ALJ decision, January 28, 1993)

Newmont Gold Company (FMSHRC WEST 92-665-DM): Discrimination case dismissed without prejudice

Decision type
ALJ decision
Docket
WEST 92-665-DM
Decided
January 28, 1993
Presiding judge
John J. Morris
Outcome
Procedural
Precedential status
Final order, not precedent
Checked against source
2026-08-15
Cited standards
29 C.F.R. § 2700.44
Official source
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)
PDF
View Official PDF

Apply this to your situation

This order from 1993 bound only the parties to this case; it isn't precedent. Ask about your situation and see what the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent say, with citations.

Currency note: this decision dates from 1993
The MSHA standards may have been amended, penalty amounts have been adjusted, and later Commission or court decisions may have changed the analysis since then. Treat this page as historical context, not current compliance advice. Verify the current standard before relying on any specific rule, threshold, or penalty mentioned here.
Final ALJ decision, not Commission precedent
This ruling became final under the 40-day rule in 30 U.S.C. § 823(d)(1) because no later Commission review appears in the official index. It binds the parties but is not Commission precedent. The full text below is from the official FMSHRC release.
About this page: The plain-English summary and decision snapshot below were written by Ezel based on the official FMSHRC release. The full text is the agency's own release.
Read the official release (fmshrc.gov)

Plain-English summary

The Judge had previously ordered temporary reinstatement under Commission Rule 44. The complainant then filed a separate discrimination complaint that was docketed as WEST 92-654-DM and assigned to another ALJ. The Judge dismissed the earlier temporary-reinstatement case without prejudice, allowing the complainant to proceed in the separately docketed discrimination case.

Decision snapshot

  • Governing provision: 29 C.F.R. § 2700.44
  • Outcome: The case was dismissed without prejudice.
  • Key point: A temporary-reinstatement matter may be dismissed without prejudice when the underlying discrimination complaint is separately docketed for further proceedings.

Full text (FMSHRC public release)

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION 1244 SPEER BOULEVARD #280
DENVER, CO 80204-3582
(303) 844-5266/FAX (303) 844-5268

January 28, 1993

SECRETARY OF LABOR, MSHA, : DISCRIMINATION PROCEEDING
on behalf of
:
DANIEL L. BAKER,
: Docket No. WEST 92-665-DM
Complainant, : WE MD-02-09
:
v. : South Area Quarry
:
NEWMONT GOLD COMPANY, :
Respondent, :

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Before: Judge Morris

In the above case, the undersigned entered an order of temporary reinstatement pursuant to Commission Rule 44, 29 C.F.R.
2700.44

Subsequently, a discrimination complaint was filed by Com- plainant and docketed with the Commission as WEST 92-654-DM.
Further, the case was assigned to Administrative Law Judge
Michael A. Lasher, Jr.

Accordingly, the captioned case is DISMISSED without prejudice to Complainant to proceed in WEST 92-654-DM.

John J. Morris
Administrative Law Judge

Distribution:

Susan Lewald, Esq., Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of
Labor, 71 Stevenson Street, Suite 1110, San Francisco, CA 94105-
2999

Charles W. Newcom, Esq., 633 17th Street, Suite 3000, Denver, CO
80202

ek

What applies to your situation today?

This order bound one employer. Ezel checks the current MSHA standards and Commission precedent against your facts, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace