937 F.2d 623 (Fed. Cir. 1991), 91-5051, Anderson v. U.S.

• Citation: 937 F.2d 623
• Party Name: Glenn Franklin ANDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.
• Case Date: June 13, 1991
• Court: United States Courts of Appeals, United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Page 623

937 F.2d 623 (Fed. Cir. 1991)

Glenn Franklin ANDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

The UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 91-5051.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit

June 13, 1991

Editorial Note:

This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTAF Rule 47.6 and FI CTAF App. V, IOP 9 regarding use of unpublished opinions)

22 Cl.Ct. 178.

AFFIRMED.

Before MICHEL, Circuit Judge, SKELTON, Senior Circuit Judge, and LOURIE, Circuit Judge.

DECISION

PER CURIAM.

This case is an appeal from the December 14, 1990, order of the United States Claims Court dismissing appellant's claim for lack of jurisdiction. Anderson v. United States, 22 Cl.Ct. 178 (1990). We affirm the court's dismissal.

OPINION

Appellant entered the Air Force in 1968 and served until 1980 when his term of service expired. On August 18, 1980, he enlisted for four more years. On March 20, 1984, appellant filed an election to reenlist with the Air Force following his termination of service. However, by May 1984, appellant was having difficulty meeting the performance standards of his grade and experience levels, and on May 11, 1984, the Air Force, under Air Force Regulation 35-32, paragraph 15, placed him on the "control" roster in order to monitor and improve his performance.

Appellant filed a grievance with his Commander on August 11, 1984, arguing that such placement jeopardized his reenlistment eligibility. His Commander responded to the grievance by stating that appellant's performance had been unsatisfactory and that the placement was proper.

The term of enlistment expired on August 17, 1984, at which time appellant was separated from the Air Force with an honorable discharge. On October 15, 1986, appellant applied to the Air Force Board for the Correction of Military Records to be reinstated to active duty with all privileges, pay, and allowances from the time of discharge. The Board denied his application for relief on June 16, 1988; it found that no probable error or injustice had been committed. Appellant filed four requests for reconsideration with the Board, all of which were denied, the last one occurring on July 14, 1989.

Appellant then filed a complaint in the Claims Court seeking reinstatement to active duty, back pay, allowances, and damages on the ground that the Air Force improperly refused to reenlist him after the expiration of his...