Opinions
on

This morning the Federal Circuit released one nonprecedential opinion, ten nonprecedential orders, and one Rule 36 judgment. The opinion affirms a grant of a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in a pro se case. One of the orders summarily affirms a final judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, while four of the orders transfer cases. Five of the orders are dismissals. Here are the introductions to the opinion, summary affirmance, and transfers, as well as links to the dismissals and Rule 36 judgment.

Bennett v. United States (Nonprecedential)

James Bennett and Pamela Bennett (the “Bennetts”), proceeding pro se, seek, as they have many times before, compensation for the foreclosure by Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA”) of a property owned by Pamela Bennett. In a complaint filed in the Court of Federal Claims, the Bennetts asserted various bases for the federal government’s purported obligation to pay them, including the statutory authority of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC” or “Comptroller”) which they contend is money-mandating, a consent order entered into between BANA and the OCC, and a supposed illegal exaction of their money. The Court of Federal Claims found the Bennetts’ claims frivolous and granted the government’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

We agree with the Court of Federal Claims. The Bennetts failed to articulate a money-mandating source of law giving the Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction, failed to identify a contract or consent order that they have a right to enforce, and fail to show any error in the trial court’s judgment. Thus, we affirm.

Everett v. United States (Nonprecedential Order)

The United States moves to summarily affirm the final judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing Justin Everett’s complaint. Mr. Everett has not responded. We grant the motion.

Aquino v. Biden (Nonprecedential Order)

In response to this court’s August 27, 2024 show cause order, Joseph R. Biden, Jr. argues for dismissal or transfer, ECF No. 5. Paul Anthony Aquino has not responded.

The appeal and all its filings are transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.

Gray v. Staley (Nonprecedential Order)

Upon consideration of Linwood Gray’s response to this court’s August 16, 2024 show cause order, urging transfer of this fiduciary embezzlement and conversion case to the proper regional circuit, here the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, see 28 U.S.C. §§ 41, 1294, 1631.

This appeal and all case filings are transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.

Hightower v. United States Postal Service (Nonprecedential Order)

Aubrey J. Hightower petitions this court for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board’s final decision affirming his removal and rejecting his affirmative defenses, including disability discrimination and retaliation for engaging in equal employment opportunity activity. The United States Postal Service (“USPS”) moves to waive Federal Circuit Rule 27(f) and dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. Mr. Hightower opposes the motion.

The motion is granted to the extent that the matter and all case filings are transferred to the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.

Kunau v. Department of Veterans Affairs (Nonprecedential Order)

Tom Kunau petitions this court for review of the Merit Systems Protection Board’s final decision affirming his removal and rejecting his affirmative defense of discrimination based on gender and race. In response to this court’s September 17, 2024 show cause order, the Department of Veterans Affairs argues for dismissal or transfer. Mr. Kunau has not filed a response.

This matter and all case filings are transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Utah pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631.

Dismissals

Rule 36 Judgment