Opinions

This morning the Federal Circuit released one precedential opinion and one nonprecedential opinion. The precedential opinion affirms in part and reverses and remands in part for further proceedings a dismissal by the Court of Federal Claims of five claims raising statutory, contract, and constitutional issues. The nonprecedential opinion affirms a judgment of the Merit Systems Protection Board. Here are the introductions to the opinions.

The Portland Mint v. United States (Precedential)

The Portland Mint (“Portland Mint”) delivered truckloads of coins to a foundry designated by the United States Mint (“U.S. Mint”) pursuant to a regulation, 31 C.F.R. § 100.11, that provided for redemption of mutilated coins. The coins were melted down and used to make new coins. The U.S. Mint refused to pay for the shipment on the ground that “a very high percentage of coins submitted” were counterfeit. J.A. 288. Portland Mint, alleging that the coins were genuine, brought five claims against the United States in the Court of Federal Claims (“Claims Court”) for (1) a violation of 31 C.F.R. § 100.11, (2) breach of an implied contract, (3) breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, (4) a Fifth Amendment takings claim, and (5) an Equal Access to Justice Act claim for fees.

The Claims Court dismissed all five claims, concluding that it lacked jurisdiction for claims one and two, and that all five claims failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. We find that the Claims Court erred in dismissing claim two for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. In light of our reversal as to claim two, we affirm the dismissal of the remaining three merits claims. We do not reach claim five concerning attorneys’ fees. We affirm in part and reverse and remand in part for further proceedings.

Gharati v. Department of the Army (Nonprecedential)

Ms. Adria Gharati appeals a Merit Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”) order granting the Department of the Army’s (“Army”) petition for review and dismissing Ms. Gharati’s petition for enforcement of the April 21, 2016 initial decision of the Administrative Judge (“AJ”), which became final on May 26, 2016. Gharati v. Dep’t of the Army, No. AT-1221-13-4692-C-1, 2022 WL 2254009 (M.S.P.B. June 22, 2022) (“Board Decision”). For the reasons below, we affirm.