Ms. Koduru appealed. UNAT held that the UNDT did not err in law or fact in concluding that Ms. Koduru鈥檚 case was fully and fairly considered. Specifically, UNAT found no error in the UNDT鈥檚 finding that Ms. Koduru had failed to meet the burden of proof that the decision was based on ulterior motives and a protracted pattern of harassment, as well as to establish a causal link between the alleged incidents and the challenged administrative decision not to renew her fixed-term appointment. Rather, such a decision, as correctly determined by the UNDT, was a reasonable and proper exercise of the...