Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca13-16-02032/USCOURTS-ca13-16-02032-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Antonio Johnson
Appellant
United States
Appellee

Document Text:

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

ANTONIO JOHNSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellee

______________________ 

2016-2032

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal 

Claims in No. 1:14-cv-01236-LJB, Senior Judge Lynn J. 

Bush.

______________________ 

Decided: January 18, 2017

______________________ 

ANTONIO JOHNSON, LaGrange, KY, pro se.

ANTONIA RAMOS SOARES, Commercial Litigation 

Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of 

Justice, Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee. Also 

represented by BENJAMIN C. MIZER, ROBERT E.

KIRSCHMAN, JR., MARTIN F. HOCKEY, JR. 

______________________ 

Before DYK, REYNA, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.

Case: 16-2032 Document: 36-2 Page: 1 Filed: 01/18/2017
2 JOHNSON v. US

PER CURIAM. 

Antonio Johnson appeals the judgment of the Court of 

Federal Claims dismissing his claim that he was wrongfully discharged from the United States Army and upholding a decision by the Army Board for Correction of 

Military Records (“ABCMR”) not to convert Johnson’s 

involuntary discharge for disciplinary reasons into a 

disability retirement. We affirm. 

BACKGROUND

Johnson’s military service began with his enlistment 

in the Army on January 29, 1980. He received an involuntary administrative “general discharge under honorable 

conditions” on December 13, 1988. In the two years leading up to his discharge, Johnson was disciplined for 

various instances of misconduct, including a conviction for 

driving under the influence, nonpayment of debts and 

court judgments, and for being absent without leave. 

In connection with his discharge, Johnson received a 

comprehensive medical evaluation on April 21, 1988. 

Records from this evaluation indicated that Johnson

complained of a “[r]ecent gain or loss of weight” and 

“[r]ecurrent back pain,” but that he suffered from no other 

ailments besides those he had identified. Appx225–26.

Handwritten annotations also reflected that Johnson was 

hospitalized in 1984 following a motor vehicle accident in 

which he injured his back. Clinical evaluations of Johnson concluded that he was physically qualified for separation and that he had the mental capacity to understand 

and participate in his discharge proceedings. Four weeks 

after being medically evaluated for military discharge, 

Johnson was hospitalized for eighteen days due to chest 

pain and given a diagnosis of pleurodynia secondary to a 

viral infection. He left the hospital on June 6, 1988, 

“markedly improved,” with instructions that he be given 

limited duty for one week. Appx163.

Case: 16-2032 Document: 36-2 Page: 2 Filed: 01/18/2017
JOHNSON v. US 3 

In 2013, Johnson filed an application with the 

ABCMR, asserting that he was entitled to a medical 

disability discharge retirement in 1988. He requested that

his military discipline records be expunged, his general 

discharge voided, and that he be awarded medical disability retirement. The ABCMR denied his application on 

October 15, 2014. 

Johnson then filed a complaint in the Court of Federal 

Claims alleging that he had been wrongfully discharged 

from the Army and that he was entitled to “physical 

disability retirement with pay.” Appx7. The court granted 

the government’s motion to dismiss Johnson’s wrongful 

military discharge claim as jurisdictionally barred by the 

six-year limitations period of 28 U.S.C. § 2501. The court 

also granted the government’s motion for judgment on the 

administrative record with respect to Johnson’s disability 

retirement claim, finding that the ABCMR’s denial of 

Johnson’s application was neither arbitrary, capricious, 

nor unsupported by substantial evidence. Johnson appealed. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(3). 

DISCUSSION

We review a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction de novo. See Shoshone Indian Tribe of Wind River 

Reservation, Wyo. v. United States, 672 F.3d 1021, 1029 

(Fed. Cir. 2012). “We review a decision of the Court of 

Federal Claims granting or denying a motion for judgment on the administrative record without deference . . . 

[and] will not disturb the decision of the [ABCMR] unless 

it is arbitrary, capricious, contrary to law, or unsupported 

by substantial evidence.” Chambers v. United States, 417 

F.3d 1218, 1227 (Fed. Cir. 2005). 

Our cases make clear that a claim for wrongful discharge accrues at the time the discharge occurred. See 

Martinez v. United States, 333 F.3d 1295, 1303 (Fed. Cir. 

2003) (en banc). Johnson’s wrongful discharge claim was 

filed in the Court of Federal Claims more than two decCase: 16-2032 Document: 36-2 Page: 3 Filed: 01/18/2017
4 JOHNSON v. US

ades after his discharge from the Army in 1988. His claim 

is therefore barred by the six-year statute of limitations of 

28 U.S.C. § 2501. 

As for Johnson’s claim of entitlement to military disability retirement benefits, we perceive no error in either 

the analysis of the Court of Federal Claims or that of the

ABCMR. In order to establish entitlement to disability 

retirement, Johnson was required to show that his service 

was “interrupted . . . because of a physical disability 

incurred or aggravated in service” and that he could “no 

longer continue to reasonably perform” his duties. Army 

Reg. 635–40 ¶ 3–2(b)(1) (Mar. 8, 2006).1 In finding that 

Johnson did not satisfy this standard, the ABCMR considered Johnson’s medical records, including the medical 

evaluation of Johnson taken as part of his discharge 

proceedings, which had found him “medically qualified for 

separation.” Appx113. The ABCMR accepted this as 

evidence that Johnson was “medically and psychiatrically 

fit for military service” at the time of his discharge. Id.

The record of Johnson’s hospitalization for chest pain 

shortly after his evaluation does not yield a different 

conclusion, and Johnson identifies no other record that 

would. To the extent that Johnson alleges on appeal that 

military personnel misled him or fabricated records, that 

his records are inaccurate, or that his discharge was 

procedurally flawed, he identifies no evidence that would 

 

1 See also Army Reg. 635–40 ¶ 2–1 (Dec. 13, 1985) 

(“The mere presence of an impairment does not, of itself, 

justify a finding of unfitness because of physical disability. In each case, it is necessary to compare the nature 

and degree of physical disability present with the requirements of the duties the member reasonably may be 

expected to perform because of his or her office, grade, 

rank, or rating . . . .”).

Case: 16-2032 Document: 36-2 Page: 4 Filed: 01/18/2017
JOHNSON v. US 5 

support such allegations. The judgment of the Court of 

Federal Claims is 

AFFIRMED

COSTS

No costs.

Case: 16-2032 Document: 36-2 Page: 5 Filed: 01/18/2017