Case Name: William C. Turnage, III v. United States Department of Agriculture
Court: United States Court of Claims
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1982-07-23
Citations: 231 Ct. Cl. 859
Docket Number: App. No. 10-82
Parties: William C. Turnage, III v. United States Department of Agriculture
Judges: Before Davis, Nichols and Bennett, Judges.
Reporter: United States Court of Claims Reports
Volume: 231
Pages: 859–860

Head Matter:
App. No. 10-82.
July 23, 1982
William C. Turnage, III v. United States Department of Agriculture
William C. Turnage, III, pro se.
Robert A. Reutershan, with whom was Assistant Attorney General J. Paul McGrath, for respondent. Albert Berry, Office of General Counsel, Department of Agriculture, of counsel.
Before Davis, Nichols and Bennett, Judges.

Opinion:
per curiam:
This is an appeal from a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board ( mspb ), upholding the employing agency's denial to petitioner of a within-grade increase in pay. Turnage v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, M.S.P.B., No. DC531D8010018, decided February 1, 1982. Defendant moves to dismiss on the ground that we have no jurisdiction over an administrative denial of a discretionary within-grade pay increase. Petitioner has failed to respond and his time to do so has expired.
This matter is directly controlled by Holder v. Department of the Army, 229 Ct.Cl. 417, 670 F.2d 1007 (1982) and Duke v. Department of the Air Force, 230 Ct.Cl. 977 (1982), both of which decisions rule squarely that we have no jurisdiction, as the United States Court of Claims, over denials of discretionary within-grade pay raises. Those decisions are binding and inclusive here.
Defendant's motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed.
This Court has previously upheld the MSPB's earlier decision affirming the employing agency's separate determination to remove petitioner. Turnage v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Appeal No. 27-80, 230 Ct.Cl. 799 (1982).