it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law.” Id. (citing 5 U.S.C. § 7703(c)). On appeal, Ms. Trotter-Low only'argues the merits of her case — that the four years it took the OPM to process her paperwork was unreasonable and caused her severe financial and personal hardship. She does not address whether there was good cause for her delay in filing her Board appeal. As the Board explained in its December 24, 2014 Order, the burden is on Ms. Trotter-Low to come forward with evidence or argument explaining that good cause existed for her untimely filing. Ms. Trotter-Low did not respond to the Board’s Order. Under the facts presented, we cannot say the Board abused its discretion in dismissing her appeal as untimely filed. Id. at 653-64 (<HOLDING>). Conolusion For the foregoing reasons, the
holding that an appeal to an agency review board would be futile because the board lacked authority to invalidate ordinance as requested holding that arbitrator was bound by perc determination that board acted for disciplinary reasons where board failed to appeal that determination holding that the board did not abuse its discretion by dismissing an untimely appeal where the appellant failed to respond to a board order to show cause holding that the district court was authorized to remand the proceedings to the board where the board failed to make required findings holding that an order was not based on substantial reason when the board failed to show how the facts that it identifies connect to its conclusion