In
Moore, the federal-employee plaintiff prevailed before the OFO on the issue of liability but was unsatisfied with the OFO's remedial award.
780 F.2d at 1561. He filed a civil action, asking the district court to “conduct a hearing on the merits of [his claim].”
Id. After a bench trial, the district court entered judgment in favor of the employing agency.
Id. The plaintiff appealed, arguing that the district court was bound by the OFO's finding of discrimination.
Id. at 1562. The Eleventh Circuit carefully dissected Title VII and its accompanying regulations and explained, as we have, that federal employees who are aggrieved by an OFO decision may file either (1) a civil action seeking de novo consideration of his claim, or (2) accept the OFO decision and, in the event the agency does not comply, file a suit for enforcement in the district court. In a suit for enforcement, the court observed, the plaintiff does not put the OFO's underlying finding of liability at issue.
Id. at 1564 (“[A]n employee who seeks redress of an agency's refusal to comply with [the OFO's decision] .... may request enforcement by the district court without requesting and trying the merits of the claim.”). By contrast, the plaintiff before it had specifically asked the district court to evaluate his entire claim de novo.
Id. (“[W]here ... the employee files a complaint asking the district court to consider the case on the merits and proceeds to trial de novo of the very claims resolved by the [OFO], he or she cannot complain when the district court independently resolves the claim on the merits.”). In this situation, the court concluded that the district court did not err in issuing judgment against the plaintiff.
Id.