Court Opinion

ID: 2965073
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:34:52.663224+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:43:05.129657
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

        No. 97-1964

                           JOSE F. HERNANDEZ-ORTIZ, ET AL.,

                               Plaintiffs, Appellants,

                                          v.

                              EMILIO DIAZ-COLON, ET AL.,

                                Defendants, Appellees.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

                  [Hon. Carmen Consuelo Cerezo, U.S. District Judge]
                                                ___________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                               Boudin, Stahl and Lynch,
                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________

                                 ____________________

            Nydia Maria Diaz-Buxo on brief for appellants.
            _____________________
            Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, and Fidel  A. Sevillano Del
            _____________                              _______________________
        Rio, Assistant  United States Attorney,  on brief for  appellee United
        ___
        States of America.

                                 ____________________

                                   January 23, 1998
                                 ____________________

                 Per  Curiam.  Jose  Hernandez-Ortiz and his  wife, Lydia
                 ___________

            Esther  Delgado-Lopez,  appeal  from  the  district   court's

            dismissal  under  Fed. R.  Civ.  P. 12(b)(6)  of  their civil

            rights and  employment discrimination claims  arising out  of

            Hernandez' separation from the Puerto Rico Air National Guard

            ("PRANG"). "In the  Rule 12(b)(6) milieu, an  appellate court

            operates  under the same  constraints that bind  the district

            court,  that is,  we may  affirm a  dismissal for  failure to

            state a  claim only if  it clearly appears, according  to the

            facts  alleged,  that  the plaintiff  cannot  recover  on any

            viable theory."   Correa-Martinez v.  Arrillaga-Belendez, 903
                              _______________     __________________

            F.2d 49, 52 (1st Cir. 1990) (citations omitted).

                 I. Civil Rights Claims
                    ___________________

                 We agree with the district court that appellants' claims

            pursuant  to 42 U.S.C.     1983 and 1985 are non-justiciable.

            We need not decide whether  the "bright line rule" adopted in

            Wright v.  Park, 5 F.3d  587, 590 (1st Cir.  1983) applies to
            ______     ____

            claims  for injunctive relief  in the form  of reinstatement.

            In Penagaricano v.  Llenza, 747 F.2d 55, 59  (1st Cir. 1984),
               ____________     ______

            this  court applied  an analysis  first stated  by the  Fifth

            Circuit in  Mindes v. Seaman,  453 F.2d 197 (5th  Cir. 1971),
                        ______    ______

            and  found   plaintiff's  claims,   including  a   claim  for

            reinstatement in the  National Guard,  to be  nonjusticiable.

            Even if we were  to apply the Mindes factors to  the facts of
                                          ______

            this case, we would conclude, as we did in Penagaricano, that
                                                       ____________

                                         -2-

            a  balancing   of  those   factors  "favors   a  finding   of

            nonreviewability."  Penagaricano, 747 F.2d at 64.    
                                ____________

                 II. Employment Discrimination Claims
                     ________________________________

                 Hernandez'    complaint    alleges    that    defendants

            discriminated  against  him  on  the  basis  of  his age  and

            political beliefs, but does  not allege discrimination  based

            on race, color, religion, sex or national origin.  Therefore,

            Hernandez has not stated a  claim for relief under Title VII.

            Nor  is   Hernandez  entitled   to  relief   under  the   Age

            Discrimination in Employment  Act (ADEA).  The ADEA  does not

            apply to uniformed members of the armed services.  See, e.g.,
                                                               ___  ____

            Spain v. Ball, 928 F.2d 61, 63 (2d Cir. 1991).  Specifically,
            _____    ____

            conduct of the Air National Guard "is beyond the reach of the

            ADEA."  Johnson v. State of New York, 49 F.3d 75, 78 (2d Cir.
                    _______    _________________

            1995); see  also Frey v.  State of California, 982  F.2d 399,
                   ___  ____ ____     ___________________

            404 (9th Cir. 1993).

                 The  district court's Opinion  and Order dated  July 15,

            1997, is summarily affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.
                     _________ ________   ___

                                         -3-