Rippley failed to comply with procedural orders and neither appeared for nor explained his absence from the hearing. Having considered the record and the ALJ's reasoning, we conclude that Rippley's complaint should be dismissed because he abandoned his claim.
[Page 3]
Accordingly, the Board ACCEPTS the ALJ's Recommended Order and DISMISSES Rippley's complaint.
SO ORDERED.
M. CYNTHIA DOUGLASS
Chief Administrative Appeals Judge
DAVID G. DYE
Administrative Appeals Judge
[ENDNOTES]
1 49 U.S.C.A. § 31105 (West 2007), and implementing regulations, 29 C.F.R. Part 1978 (2006).
2 29 C.F.R. § 1978.109(c); Monroe v. Cumberland Transp. Corp., ARB No. 01-101, ALJ No. 00-STA-50 (ARB Sept. 26, 2001).
3 Cf. Rose v. ATC Vancom, Inc., ARB No. 05-091, ALJ No. 2005-STA-014, slip op. at 3 (ARB Aug. 31, 2006).
4 Ferguson v. Bomac Lubricant Techs., Inc., ARB No. 04-057, ALJ No. 2002-STA-27 (ARB June 29, 2005).