When a civil servant changes a claim to a 'mixed case' during the District Court's non-hearing proceedings and she files to remand based on non-jurisdiction, does the U.S. Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit have jurisdiction to affirm and adjudicate by Summary Judgment the Title VII claim without remedy for the nondiscrimination claim that departs from the accepted course of judicial proceedings as sanctioned by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, in Kerr v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 20172538, November 15, 2018?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED : 1. When a civil servant changes a claim to a ‘mixed case’ during the District Court’s non-hearing proceedings and she files to remand based on non-jurisdiction, does the U.S. Federal Court of : Appeals for the Ninth Circuit have jurisdiction to affirm and adjudicate by Summary Judgment : the Title VII claim without remedy for the nondiscrimination claim that departs from the ac; cepted course of judicial proceedings as sanctioned by the U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, in Kerr v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 20172538, November 15, 2018? 2. When the U.S. Federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rules by Summary Judgment solely on the Title VII discrimination claim on a civil servant’s filed mixed-case claim and the Appeals Court does not provide a remedy to administratively exhaust the mixed case as a whole, does this ruling conflict with the U.S. Supreme Court of the United States opinion regarding the civil servant’s rights to file or appeal a mixed case to the Merit Service Protection Board (MSPB) (Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 16-399, June 23, 2017)?