Steiner v. The City of Canton, 2001-WPC-1 (ALJ Jan. 7, 2002)

U.S. Department of Labor

Office of Administrative Law Judges Seven Parkway Center - Room 290 Pittsburgh, PA 15220 (412) 644-5754 (412) 644-5005 (FAX)

Issue date: 07Jan2002
CASE NO.: 2001-WPC-1

In the Matter of:

MICHAEL S. STEINER
    Complainant

    v.

THE CITY OF CANTON
    Respondent

   The above-captioned claim was scheduled for an oral hearing before the undersigned on December 5 and 6, 2001 in Canton, Ohio. A Notice of Hearing was mailed to Complainant by Certified Return Receipt on October 23, 2001, advising him of the time and place for the hearing. The United States Postal Service attempted delivery on October 26, 2001, October 31, 2001, and November 10, 2001 before returning the correspondence as unclaimed to sender.

   A second copy of the Notice of Hearing was mailed by both regular First Class Mail and by Certified Return Receipt to the Complainant on November 16, 2001. Again, the United States Postal Service attempted delivery of the Order on November 20, 2001, November 25, 2001, and December 25, 2001 before returning the correspondence to sender as unclaimed. However, the copy which was mailed by regular First Class Mail has not been returned as undeliverable. On December 5, 2001, the Complainant failed to appear for the hearing.

   On December 12, 2001, Complainant was ordered to show cause, in writing to the undersigned, on or before January 4, 2002, why his case should not be dismissed for failure to respond to the pre-hearing order and for his failure to appear before the undersigned at the scheduled hearing. As with the Notice of Hearing, the Order to Show Cause was mailed to Complainant by both regular First Class Mail and by Certified Return Receipt to Complainant December 12, 2001. The United States Postal Service attempted delivery of the Order on December 18, 2001 and December 30, 2001 before returning the correspondence to sender as unclaimed. However, the copy which was mailed by regular First Class Mail has not been returned as undeliverable

   Considering that Complainant did not respond to the pre-hearing order, did not appear at the time of the hearing, and did not respond to the Order to Show Cause, I find it appropriate to dismiss the case pursuant to the Code of Federal Regulations. See 29 C.F.R. § 24.6(e)(4); See also 29 C.F.R. § 18.39(b).

   Based upon the foregoing, it is HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the above-captioned matter be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

       ROBERT J. LESNICK
       Administrative Law Judge

NOTICE: This Recommended Order of Dismissal will automatically become the final order of the Secretary unless, pursuant to 29 C.F.R.§ 24.8, a petition for review is timely filed with the Administrative Review Board, United States Department of Labor, Room S-4309, Frances Perkins Building, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20210. Such a petition for review must be received by the Administrative Review Board within ten business days of the date of this Recommended Order of Dismissal and shall be served on all parties and on the Chief Administrative Law Judge. See 29 C.F.R. §§ 24.8 and 24.9, as amended by 63 Fed. Reg. 6614 (1998).