Amanda Mojdeh Raiszadeh v. Department of Homeland Security

Whether the Administrative Judge improperly conflated a proposed management “Focus Group” that was repeatedly postponed and ultimately never occurred with separate “Draft Focus Group Meeting Notes” prepared by a union representative and circulated among clerical employees, then relied upon those notes as evidence supporting the agency’s justification for Petitioner’s termination despite record evidence establishing that the two were distinct and unrelated events. Appx. 1749, 1863, 1776-1779, 277-281, 339-344.

Whether the Administrative Judge improperly relied upon unsworn and unsigned Draft Focus Group Meeting Notes as evidence of widespread complaints against Petitioner where the record does not establish that management contemporaneously possessed or relied upon those notes when the termination decision was made, and where the notes first appeared in a Report of Investigation approximately one year after Petitioner’s termination. Appx. 1749, 1863, 1776- 1779.

Whether Petitioner’s Fifth Amendment due process rights were violated where Petitioner received two “0” performance ratings allegedly based upon a management “Focus Group” intervention and mediation process that undisputedly never occurred because the meetings were repeatedly postponed and ultimately cancelled. Appx. 1489-1490, 339-344, 277-281.

Whether the Merit Systems Protection Board and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit misapplied the Whistleblower Protection Act, 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(8), and the clear-and-convincing evidence standard under Carr v. Social Security Administration, 185 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 1999), and Whitmore v. Department of Labor, 680 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2012), by affirming Petitioner’s termination despite substantial evidence that the agency’s justification relied upon contradictory, unreliable, and non-contemporaneous evidence following Petitioner’s