James Chang v. Merit Systems Protection Board, and United States Immigration and Naturalization Service
James CHANG, Petitioner, v. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, and United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondents
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
We conclude, in agreement with the decisions in Wiggins v. United States Postal Service, 653 F.2d 219 (5th Cir. 1981) and Christo v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 667 F.2d 882 (10th Cir. 1981), that mixed cases involving both claims of discrimination and of improper agency action must be brought as one action in the district court. Accordingly we lack jurisdiction over the petition and it is therefore dismissed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 9 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Chang v. Smith
- Joseph F. WILLIAMS v. DEPARTMENT OF the ARMY
- Lloyd J. Hayes v. United States Government Printing Office
- Perry E. DOYAL v. John O. MARSH, Jr., in His Official Capacity as Secretary of the Army
- James Chang v. William French Smith
- Andrew L. Tolliver v. James Deniro, Director of Veterans Administration Medical Center, Palo Alto, California
Most recent
- Williams v. Frank
- Andrew L. Tolliver v. James Deniro, Director of Veterans Administration Medical Center, Palo Alto, California
- Perry E. DOYAL v. John O. MARSH, Jr., in His Official Capacity as Secretary of the Army
- Miller v. Department of the Air Force
- James Chang v. William French Smith
- Chang v. Smith
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.