Court Opinion

ID: 9441203
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 17:25:41.026974+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:28:09.875562
License: Public Domain

MAYER, Circuit Judge *,
dissenting.
In my view, this case is controlled by Bowen v. Massachusetts, 487 U.S. 879, 108 S.Ct. 2722, 101 L.Ed.2d 749 (1988), and Katz v. Cisneros, 16 F.3d 1204 (Fed.Cir.1994). By not following those cases this court is transferring our case to a court without either jurisdiction or the power to grant the requested relief. The Court of Federal Claims cannot grant the relief sought because the case challenges a regulation. Categorizing Texas Health’s action as a contract claim ignores that fact. The Court of Federal Claims can neither entertain a declaratory judgment action to hold the regulation invalid nor equitably reform the contract. Bowen, 487 U.S. at 905, 108 S.Ct. 2722 (“The Claims Court does not have the general equitable powers of a district court to grant prospective relief.”). Accordingly, I would affirm the order of the district court denying the motion to dismiss and the motion to transfer the case to the Court of Federal Claims.

 Haldane Robert Mayer vacated the position of Chief Judge on December 24, 2004.