On May 9, 2007, the ARB issued an Order requiring Vodicka to state under which of the three options, he wished to proceed. Vodicka, through counsel, averred that he wished "to withdraw his objections to the Findings and Order of the Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1980.111(c)."
We APPROVE Vodicka's request for withdrawal of his objections to the Administrative Law Judge's Recommended Decision and Order Dismissing the
[Page 3]
Complaint and DISMISS his appeal. Accordingly, the Recommended Decision and Order Dismissing the Complaint becomes the Department of Labor's final order in this case.
SO ORDERED.
M. CYNTHIA DOUGLASS
Chief Administrative Appeals Judge
OLIVER M. TRANSUE
Administrative Appeals Judge
[ENDNOTES]
1 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A (West Supp. 2005). The regulations implementing SOX are found at 29 C.F.R. Part 1980 (2006).
2 Secretary's Order 1-2002 (Delegation of Authority and Responsibility to the Administrative Review Board), 67 Fed. Reg. 64,272 (Oct. 17, 2002); 29 C.F.R. §§ 1980.110.
3 29 C.F.R. § 1980.110(a).
4 29 C.F.R. § 1980.111(c), (d)(2); 29 C.F.R. § 1980.114.
5 29 C.F.R. § 1980.111(c).
6 29 C.F.R. § 1980.111(d)(2).
7 See e.g., Macktal v. Sec'y of Labor, 923 F.2d 1150, 1154 (5th Cir. 1991); Barker v. Perma-Fix of Dayton, ARB No. 06-045, ALJ No. 2006-SOX-1 (ARB July 10, 2006)(SOX settlements must be filed with the ARB).
8 29 C.F.R. § 1980.114.