Accordingly, we ordered the parties to show cause no later than November 26, 2007, why the Board should not dismiss Stone's appeal pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1980.114.
Stone filed a response stating that he had filed an action for de novo review in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. Instrumentation Laboratory did not respond to the Board's Order. Accordingly, we DISMISS Stone's appeal.
SO ORDERED.
M. CYNTHIA DOUGLASS
Chief Administrative Appeals Judge
OLIVER M. TRANSUE
Administrative Appeals Judge
[ENDNOTES]
1 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A (West 2002).
2 Secretary's Order No. 1-2002, 67 Fed. Reg. 64,272 (Oct. 17, 2002); 29 C.F.R. § 1980.110(a)(2007).
3 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A(b)(1)(B); 29 C.F.R. § 1980.114. As is the usual case, by the time the Board received the petition for review, the 180-day period for deciding the case had already expired.