Federal Circuit Liberally Defines Scope of Reasonableness in Petitions for Enforcement

In November 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit heard an appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) to determine whether a petition for enforcement (PFE) of a settlement agreement was timely. PFEs can be used by employees to enforce the terms of a settlement agreement that has previously been entered into by the parties. MSPB regulations often set filing deadlines by number of days. However, for the filing of PFEs, the only guidance provided on the issue of timeliness is that they must be “filed promptly.” See 5 CFR 1201.182(a). Case law expands on the word “promptly” in detailing that a PFE which “alleg[es] a breach of a settlement agreement must be filed within a reasonable amount of time of the date the petitioning party becomes aware of a breach of the agreement.” Kasarsky v. MSPB, 296 F.3d 1331, 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2002). The Federal Circuit held in this precedential decision that based on the circumstances, 14 months was a reasonable amount of time to wait to file a PFE after learning of the alleged breach, taking a broad approach to the word “reasonable.”

Miguel Reyes was a police officer with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Central California Health Care System (CCHCS). In 2012, Reyes was removed from his position and appealed to the MSPB. Reyes and the VA entered into a settlement agreement. The settlement provided that only neutral employment references could be given on Reyes’s behalf by the VA. By policy, said references only identified Reyes’s dates of employment and job title. Additionally, the references explained Reyes’s VA employment ended by resignation.

In 2016, Reyes received a conditional job offer subject to a background investigation by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). In Summer 2016, Reyes told the OPM investigator that he voluntarily resigned from the VA, but the investigator implied that OPM knew about the circumstances of his separation from the VA. In November 2016, Reyes received the OPM background investigation which stated that “per a binding legal agreement, [the HR officer] was only allowed to release [Reyes’s] dates of employment.” In June 2017, Reyes’s potential employer sought clarification on his VA termination, and in response Reyes provided a copy of the settlement. In September 2017, Reyes’s conditional offer was revoked.

On January 17, 2018, Reyes informed the VA of an alleged breach of settlement agreement and said he would file a PFE if he did not receive a response. Reyes did not receive a response and filed a PFE on January 18, 2018, arguing that the VA HR Officer’s disclosure violated the settlement and cost him an employment opportunity. The VA argued that they complied with the settlement agreement and said the PFE was untimely.

In June 2018, the administrative judge issued an initial decision which deemed the PFE untimely and argued that Reyes knew of the alleged breach when he received the OPM background check in November 2016. The 14-month delay in filing the PFE was designated as “unreasonable under the circumstances presented.” Reyes appealed the administrative judge’s decision to the full Board. The MSPB denied Reyes’s petition for review and affirmed the administrative judge’s initial decision.

The Federal Circuit ruled that the MSPB erred in dismissing the PFE for untimeliness. As mentioned, the MSPB has set no deadlines for the filing of PFEs. Reasonableness of time by way of promptness is currently the only standard. The 10-month period from November 2016 to September 2017, was deemed reasonable based on the circumstances of the case. Although Reyes received the OPM background investigation in November 2016, the Federal Circuit said it was not unreasonable for Reyes to wait until he knew of resulting harm from the breach of the settlement, the revocation of his conditional job offer in September 2017, to file a PFE. The Federal Circuit also held that it was not unreasonable for Reyes to retain counsel over the course of three months – from September 2017 to December 2017 – before contacting the VA and filing his PFE in January 2018.

Upon holding the PFE was filed in a reasonable amount of time, the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded the decision for further proceedings.

Read the full case: Reyes v. MSPB