###
The following FOIA request has been submitted today:
Any documents showing any arrangement, contract, terms, conditions, or coordination between the MSPB and Thomson Reuters (which owns Westlaw) and/or MSPB and Reed Elsevier (which owns Lexis-Nexis) whereby initial decisions and Board opinions are submitted to, or collected by, Westlaw and/or Lexis-Nexis.
Initial decisions must be made public. After reading many MSPB IDs, not making some IDs public appears intended to either hide incompetence or protect questionable behavior of some AJs, including ex parte communications and collusion with Agencies. It is clear as is in the intial decision against me denying jurisdiction, that some decisions are NOT being made in accordance to the two very elementary and low level standards for jurisdiction and subsequently not in accordance with the law or statute or the evidence as provided. Additionally in my case, the AJ ruled the claim not within jurisdiction and then went on to rule on the merits of the case. He also bifurcated my case without my permission or request. This further reveals that Administrative Judges are not Judges at all. AJs are appeaar to be administrators for the MSPB three member board tasked with “disposal” of as many cases as they can.