Petitioner's 5th and 14th Amendment rights violation

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Petitioner is a preference eligible United States Veteran that has 8 years of prior federal employment with the United States Postal Service (USPS) where he reached Career Tenure Status before leaving the USPS for the private sector. On November 19*, 2015 the Petitioner received his official offer letter of employment from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) appointing him to a GS-12 IT Specialist position with job announcement number MS-15-BLS-OT-144. Job announcement number MS-15-BLS-OT-144 was a noncompetitive Veterans Employment Opportunity Act (VEOA) position. On April 2254, 2016, the Petitioner requested a shop steward regarding his “Core Hours” being removed from his schedule. On December 1*t, 2016 the Petitioner was handed a termination letter stating that he would be terminated on December 9th, 2016. The Petitioner’s termination later didn’t state why the Petitioner was being terminated. The Petitioner had 4 unexcused absences during his entire time being employed by the BLS. 1. The Petitioner pointed out in his appeal to the MSPB that upon being hired by the BLS it constituted a “Reinstatement” to federal employment where the Petitioner’s prior Career Tenure Status exempted him from a probationary period. Did the BLS, MSPB and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit violate the Petitioner's 5th and 14th Amendments Rights by disregarding Title 5 CFR § 315.201(a)(c)(4), Title 5 CFR § 315.801(d) and Title 5 USC § 4303? (D 2. Which case takes precedence? Does National Treasury Emp. Union v. Reagan where the US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that notification sent to plaintiffs of their selection to federal jobs was an unconditional appointment, even though the required appointment forms had not yet been completed or Skalafuris v. The United States where the US Court of Federal Claims ruled that a SF-50 or Oath of Office is the last act of appointing? 3. In the Petitioner’s Informal Reply Brief, the Petitioner pointed out to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that upon receiving his official offer letter of employment on November 19th, 2015, which stated “Congratulations on your appointment and welcome to the BLS” that pursuant to Title 5 CFR § 300.703 the Petitioner was appointed to federal employment. Did the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit violate the Petitioner’s 14 Amendment Right by disregarding Title 5 CFR § 300.703 and National Treasury Emp. Union v. Reagan while forcing a law on the Petitioner along with not providing the Petitioner with equal protection under the law when the court affirmed the MSPB decision referencing Skalafuris v. The United States? 4. Upon being appointed to federal employment an individual must complete requirements with other federal agencies during the “Entry on Duty” phase of the hiring process. In order to complete those requirements an individual has to be on the rolls of the hiring agency. Did the MSPB and the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit violate the Petitioner’s 5th and 14th Amendment Rights by disregarding Title 5 CFR § 315.802(c)? (ID 5. In the Petitioner’s Rehearing Request to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit the Petitioner pointed out referencing Skalafuris v. The United States that the Petitioner was on the agency rolls by December 8, 2015, and had completed a 1 year probationary period on December 7h, 2016. Did the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit violate the Petitioner’s 5 and 14th Amendment Rights by denying the Petitioner's Rehearing Request while disregarding Title 5 CFR § 300.703, Title 5 CFR § 315.802(c) and Title 5 USC § 7511? 6. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that according to Title 5 USC § 7511, the Petitioner was not a federal employee at the time of termination. If the Petitioner was not considered a federal employee at the time of termination, shouldn’t the DoL have been held accountable for violati