As expected, former UFC women’s bantamweight Leslie Smith has appealed the dismissal of her UFC labor complaint by the National Labor Relations Board.

The appeal, obtained by MMAjunkie and viewable here, disputes the NLRB’s findings and requests a review of the complaint from the same investigator who found merit in Smith’s case against the UFC.

The appeal also asks for the recusal of two national NLRB officials who were dismissive of the case in a meeting in July, according to Smith’s attorney, Lucas Middlebrook.

Middlebrook wrote the officials who reviewed the case – NLRB general counsel Peter B. Robb and deputy general counsel John W. Kyle – “cannot serve as impartial decision-makers” in the appeal. Middlebrook has accused the UFC of pulling political strings to dismiss the case after a local NLRB office found merit in Smith’s complaint.

Middlebrook has requested an investigation into why the complaint was re-routed from the NLRB’s Region 4 office – the one with jurisdiction over the matter – to the national office in Washington, D.C.

In May, Smith filed the complaint alleging the UFC unlawfully retaliated against her for her work with Project Spearhead when it bought her out of her contract and declined to offer a new one after a canceled fight against Aspen Ladd at UFC Fight Night 128.

In June, Middlebrook said the Region 4 office planned to move forward with the complaint. But this past month, the office reversed course and dismissed the case.

In a two-page written decision (viewable here), Region 4 regional director Dennis P. Walsh wrote there is “insufficient evidence” of retaliation against Smith. He indicated the non-renewal of her UFC contract was more about her salary demands than her position as an organizer.

Walsh pointed to several actions that he said benefited Smith: the extension of her contract after she turned down a fight with Tonya Evinger; allowing her to wear a Project Spearhead mouthguard for a fight with Ladd in front of a “national television audience”; and a $500 discretionary bonus for travel expenses in connection with the canceled bout.

“These decisions undermine Smith’s assertions that the UFC harbored animus against her for her protected activities,” Walsh wrote. “Finally, the investigation disclosed that negotiations broke down over the public manner in which Smith conducted negotiations with demands asking for up to a

222 percent increase over her then-current contract.

“It is not the proper role of the board, in the absence of evidence pointing to animus or pretext, to second-guess UFC’s business decisions not to continue to negotiate or renew Smith’s contract in response to these kinds of demands.”

Gallery Photos: Best of Leslie Smith view 15 images

In her appeal, Smith claims there were “numerous factual misstatements and discrepancies” in the decision. In a point-for-point rebuttal, she refutes Walsh’s findings, claiming she never demanded a 222 percent raise in order to fight Ladd. She writes a reported $100,000 to show and $100,000 win offer was not her official position in negotiations.

Smith stresses she never refused the fight with Ladd. Instead, she writes, the fight effectively was canceled when Ladd failed to make weight per their bout contracts.

Smith said the UFC failed to live up to its bout agreement by offering her another fight. She also points out her fight with Ladd was scheduled to be streamed on UFC Fight Pass – not broadcast on national TV.

Smith also disputes the idea she turned down a fight with Evinger, saying the UFC “effectively abandoned discussions” after refusing to consider “certain conditions” under which she would accept the fight.

As for the discretionary bonus, Smith indicated the UFC only paid her after she pointed out California labor law required her to be reimbursed.

Additionally, Smith underlines what she considers to be the promotion’s hostile stance toward unions. She said the NLRB “chose to ignore” a statement where she said former UFC commentator Brian Stann “expressly” told her to “avoid” talking about unionization “if I wanted to continue fighting in the UFC.”

Smith writes out that, with the recent release of Project Spearhead interim vice president Kajan Johnson, two of the organizations’s three executives have been “purged” from the promotion.

Project Spearhead’s primary goal is to get 30 percent of the UFC’s roster to sign union authorization cards so the NLRB can determine whether they are employees or independent contractors, as the UFC now classifies them.

Smith today told MMAjunkie her complaint isn’t rooted in a “vendetta” against the promotion but is ultimately aimed at giving fighters more control over their careers, whether through an association or union.

“We’re going to keep on pushing,” Smith said. “My goal for the case is they will find us to be statutory employees, so we can get everybody on board to sign cards. Because whether or not I win, it’s not really going to affect everybody else. This isn’t even a lawsuit; it’s not like there’s even money in it for me.

“For me, it’s about getting the UFC to admit we’re employees, or getting a federal office like the NLRB to confirm we are employees, so the fighters can take the next step to enjoying some of the basic protections that employees have enjoyed in the U.S. for 80 or 90 years now.”

Middlebrook said regardless of the outcome of the appeal, Smith is pursuing the promotion on other fronts. She recently filed complaints for unpaid wages and workplace retaliation in her home state of California.

For more on the UFC’s upcoming schedule, check out the UFC Rumors section of the site.