SO ORDERED.
M. CYNTHIA DOUGLASS
Chief Administrative Appeals Judge
DAVID G. DYE
Administrative Appeals Judge
[ENDNOTES]
1 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A (West 2002).
2 29 C.F.R. Part 1980 (2007).
3 15 U.S.C.A. § 781 (West).
4 15 U.S.C.A. § 780(d) (West).
5 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A.
6 Id.
7 49 U.S.C.A. § 42121 (West Supp. 2005); 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A(b)(2)(C).
8 Getman v. Southwest Sec., Inc., ARB No. 04-059, ALJ No. 2003-SOX-008 (ARB July 29, 2005). Cf. 29 C.F.R. §§ 1980.104(b), 1980.109(a). See AIR 21, § 42121(a)-(b)(2)(B)(iii)-(iv). See also Peck v. Safe Air Int'l, Inc. d/b/a Island Express, ARB No. 02-028, ALJ No. 2001-AIR-003, slip op. at 6-10 (ARB Jan. 30, 2004).
9 Getman, slip op. at 8. Cf. § 1980.104(c). See § 42121(a)-(b)(2)(B)(iv). See also Peck, slip op. at 10.
10 29 C.F.R. § 1980.103(c).
11 29 C.F.R. § 1980.103(b).
12 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A(b)(2)(D) ("An action ... shall be commenced not later than 90 days after the date on which the violation occurs."); 29 C.F.R. § 1980.103(d) ("Time for filing. Within 90 days after an alleged violation of the Act occurs (i.e., when the discriminatory decision has been both made and communicated to the complainant), an employee who believes that he or she has been discriminated against in violation of the Act may file, or have filed by any person on the employee's behalf, a complaint alleging such discrimination.").
13 See 29 C.F.R. § 1980.107.
14 Recommended Decision and Order (R. D. & O.) at 4.
15 Id. at 5.
16 Id. at 5-7.
17 Id. at 8-9.
18 Id. at 7-8.
19 Id. at 8.
20 See 29 C.F.R. § 1980.110(a).
21 Secretary's Order No. 1-2002, 67 Fed. Reg. 64,272 (Oct. 17, 2002); 29 C.F.R. § 1980.110(a).
22 29 C.F.R. § 18.40 (2006).
23 Fed. R. Civ. P. 56.
24 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986).
25 Bobreski v. United States EPA, No. 02-0732(RMU), 2003 WL 22246796, at *3 (D.D.C. Sept. 30, 2003).
26 Lee v. Schneider Nat'l, Inc., ARB No. 02-102, ALJ No. 2002- STA-025, slip op. at 2 (ARB Aug. 28, 2003); Bushway v. Yellow Freight, Inc., ARB No. 01-018, ALJ No. 2000-STA-052, slip op. at 2 (Dec. 13, 2002).
27 Bobreski, at *3 (quoting Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986)).
28 Bobreski, at *3.
29 29 C.F.R. § 18.40(c). See Webb v. Carolina Power & Light Co., No. 1993-ERA-042, slip op. at 4-6 (Sec'y July 17, 1995).
30 DMM has not raised any service of process issue.
31 See 29 C.F.R. § 1980.106(a), (b).
32 See 29 C.F.R. § 1980.107.
33 29 C.F.R. § 1980.104 (a), (c).
34 Given our dismissal of Brady's complaint because it is time-barred, we need not reach the ALJ's alternative conclusion that the Respondent is not a publicly-traded company and is not otherwise subject to the SOX.