Accordingly, we ordered the parties to show cause no later than January
[Page 3]
30, 2007, why the Board should not dismiss the appeal filed by the Complainant pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1980.114.
The Respondents replied to the Board's order stating that they knew of no reason that the Board should not dismiss Mozingo's appeal. Mozingo's response was in the form of a Motion to Dismiss Complaint Without Prejudice. Mozingo's motion is not responsive to the Board's order requesting the parties to show cause why we should not dismiss Mozingo's appeal. Furthermore, Mozingo cited to no statutory or regulatory basis, nor proffered any grounds for dismissing the complaint without prejudice. Accordingly, we DENY his motion. However, because Mozingo has opted to pursue his SOX complaint in district court rather than at the Board, we DISMISS his appeal.
SO ORDERED.
DAVID G. DYE
Administrative Appeals Judge
M. CYNTHIA DOUGLASS
Chief Administrative Appeals Judge
[ENDNOTES]
1 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A (West Supp. 2003). Title VIII of Sarbanes-Oxley is designated the Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002. Section 806 covers companies with a class of securities registered under section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C § 78l, and companies required to file reports under section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 780(d)), or any officer, employee, contractor, subcontractor, or agent of such companies. Section 806 protects employees who provide information to a covered employer or a Federal agency or Congress relating to alleged violations of 18 U.S.C. 1341, 1343, 1344, or 1348, or any rule or regulation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or any provision of Federal law relating to fraud against shareholders. In addition, employees are protected against discrimination when they have filed, testified in, participated in, or otherwise assisted in a proceeding filed or about to be filed against one of the above companies relating to any such violation or alleged violation. 68 FR 31864 (May 28, 2003).
2 29 C.F.R. Part 1980 (2006).
3 Secretary's Order No. 1-2002, 67 Fed. Reg. 64,272 (Oct. 17, 2002); 29 C.F.R. § 1980.110(a)(2006).
4 18 U.S.C.A. § 1514A(b)(1)(B); 29 C.F.R. § 1980.114. By the time the Board received the Complainant's petition for review there were only 4 days remaining in the 180-day period. Thus as is usually the case, the 180-day period for deciding the case had nearly expired before the Complainant filed his petition with the Board.