This morning the Federal Circuit released two nonprecedential opinions in cases appealed from the Court of Federal Claims. The first comes in a pro se employment case and the second addresses a claim for monetary damages for enslavement of the claimant’s Native American ancestors. The court also released five nonprecedential orders as well as a Rule 36 judgment. Here are the introductions to the opinions and orders.

Horton v. United States (Nonprecedential)

John Horton appeals from the United States Court of Federal Claims’ summary judgment denying Mr. Horton’s claim to relief from the debt collected from him by the United States. For the below reasons, we affirm.

Jarvis v. United States (Nonprecedential)

In March 2021, Derek N. Jarvis brought the present action against the United States in the Court of Federal Claims (Claims Court), seeking monetary damages based on wrongs, including enslavement, committed against or by his Native American ancestors, particularly the Cherokee. The Claims Court dismissed the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, concluding, as relevant here, that none of the sources of law cited by Mr. Jarvis provided a sufficient basis for jurisdiction over this action against the United States. Jarvis v. United States, 154 Fed. Cl. 712, reconsideration denied, 156 Fed. Cl. 393 (2021). Mr. Jarvis appeals. We affirm, discerning no error in the Claims Court’s determination that it lacked jurisdiction.

Campbell v. Office of Personnel Management (Nonprecedential Order)

In response to the court’s February 3, 2022 order to show cause, the Office of Personnel Management urges dismissal of this petition for review as untimely. Irene D. Campbell has not responded.

* * *



(1) The petition for review is dismissed.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

Core Optical Technologies, LLC v. Juniper Networks, Inc. (Nonprecedential Order)

Juniper Networks, Inc. petitions for permission to appeal from an interlocutory order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California denying Juniper’s motion to dismiss, which the district court certified pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Core Optical Technologies, LLC opposes the petition.

* * *



The petition for permission to appeal is denied.

In re Becirovic (Nonprecedential Order)

Having considered the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO)’s “Notice of Non-Filing of Certified List Due to Lack of Jurisdiction,” ECF No. 14, and appellant’s response to that notice, ECF No. 19, this court dismisses this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Rivera v. Merit Systems Protection Board (Nonprecedential Order)

Upon consideration of the parties’ joint stipulation to dismiss this petition and for the Merit Systems Protection Board to reopen Mr. Rivera’s matter for further adjudication,


(1) The petition is dismissed consistent with the parties’ agreement.

(2) Each party shall bear its own costs.

In re Marx (Nonprecedential Order)

Upon consideration of the unopposed motion of James Gelsin Marx to voluntarily dismiss this appeal pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b),


(1) The motion is granted to the extent that the appeal is withdrawn.

(2) The parties shall bear their own costs.

Rule 36 Judgment