DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: March 17, 2011 
CBCA 2191
 TYMISHA S. PRINGLE, 
Appellant, 
v. 
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, 
Respondent. 
Douglas Lee Harville of The Harville Law Firm, LLC, Shreveport, LA, counsel for 
Appellant. 
William D. Robinson, Office of General Counsel, Federal Bureau of Prisons, 
Department of Justice, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. 
POLLACK, Board Judge. 
ORDER 
This appeal arises out of contract no. DJBP051800000010 between Tymisha Pringle, 
appellant, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP), for radiologic services at the Federal 
Correctional Institution, Oakdale, Louisiana. Appellant appealed a termination for cause 
issued by the FBOP. The Board docketed the appeal on October 21, 2010.  In her notice of 
appeal, appellant has additionally sought money damages, including full payment under the 
contract. 
On November 19, 2010, the FBOP filed a motion to dismiss the appeal with prejudice, 
specifying that the FBOP had unilaterally converted appellant’s termination for cause to a 
termination for convenience, had issued a modification to that effect, and was inviting 

                                                                                       
           
              
              
            
               
              
      
               
        
  
            
           
               
              
               
            
               
             
             
             
       
_______________________________ 
  
 
2 CBCA 2191 
appellant to submit a termination for convenience settlement proposal reflecting the amount 
appellant believed she was owed. The motion stated that should appellant not be satisfied 
with costs ultimately reimbursed by the FBOP, then appellant could file a claim on that 
matter. The motion did not have concurrence of counsel for appellant. 
On November 22, 2010, the Board issued an order addressing the FBOP motion. In 
the order the Board stated that the Government appeared correct in its position that appellant 
had not previously presented a dollar claim to the Government and, as such, the Board had 
no jurisdiction over any dollar claim. Additionally, the Board pointed out that the claim was 
not certified and exceeded the certification threshold. 
The Board also noted that a dismissal of the termination for default appeal appeared 
appropriate, as the Government had unilaterally withdrawn the termination for default. The 
Board stated that whether appellant sought compensation under the provisions of the 
termination for convenience or otherwise sought to pursue a breach claim was a matter to be 
decided by appellant. If appellant could not resolve compensation with the FBOP, then that 
dispute could be subject to a separate claim and appeal. Dismissal of the instant appeal, 
challenging a wrongful termination, would not hamper appellant as to how she ultimately 
proceeded as to damages. With the above said, the Board advised counsel for appellant that 
counsel could reply to the Government’s motion and notify the Board of any objections. 
Otherwise, the Board would dismiss the action with prejudice. Counsel for appellant elected 
not to file an objection to the motion nor reply to the Board’s order. 
Consequently, the appeal is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE . 
HOWARD A. POLLACK 
Board Judge