Court Opinion

ID: 5135949
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-12-17 17:01:05.903103+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:23:52.422297
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-2141    Document: 15     Page: 1   Filed: 12/15/2021

        NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                  ______________________

                RESHAWN ARMSTRONG,
                   Plaintiff-Appellant

                             v.

      UNITED STATES, MERRICK B. GARLAND,
      ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF
     JUSTICE, FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS,
                Defendants-Appellees
               ______________________

                        2021-2141
                  ______________________

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the
 Northern District of Alabama in No. 7:20-cv-00796-RDP,
 Judge R. David Proctor.
                 ______________________

                Decided: December 15, 2021
                  ______________________

    RESHAWN ARMSTRONG, Tuscaloosa, AL, pro se.

     GALINA I. FOMENKOVA, Commercial Litigation Branch,
 Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Wash-
 ington, DC, for defendants-appellees. Also represented by
 BRIAN M. BOYNTON, MARTIN F. HOCKEY, JR., PATRICIA M.
 MCCARTHY.
                   ______________________
Case: 21-2141     Document: 15     Page: 2    Filed: 12/15/2021

 2                                           ARMSTRONG    v. US

     Before MOORE, Chief Judge, REYNA and CHEN, Circuit
                          Judges.
 PER CURIAM.
     Reshawn Armstrong originally filed this appeal in the
 Eleventh Circuit, challenging eight separate orders from
 the Northern District of Alabama. See J.A. 31–32. One
 was the district court’s December 1, 2020 order granting
 Ms. Armstrong’s motion to transfer her Fair Labor Stand-
 ards Act claim to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. J.A.
 32; J.A. 1. The Eleventh Circuit transferred the appeal of
 that order to us. Armstrong v. United States, No. 21-10200-
 CC, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 20183, at *1 (11th Cir. July 7,
 2021). We dismiss.
      “Courts of appeals employ a prudential rule that the
 prevailing party in a lower tribunal cannot ordinarily seek
 relief in the appellate court.” SkyHawke Techs., LLC v.
 Decca Int’l Corp., 828 F.3d 1373, 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (first
 citing Deposit Guar. Nat’l Bank v. Roper, 445 U.S. 326,
 333–34 (1980); then citing Camreta v. Greene, 563 U.S. 692,
 702–04 (2011)). Here, Ms. Armstrong requests that we
 transfer her Fair Labor Standards Act claim to the Claims
 Court. Appellant’s Br. 4. Yet that is precisely what the
 district court ordered on December 1, 2020. J.A. 1. The
 transfer would have occurred on February 1, 2021, after
 the 60-day stay required under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(d)(4)(B).
 J.A. 35–36. Before that process could run its course, how-
 ever, Ms. Armstrong appealed. By appealing, Ms. Arm-
 strong stayed the very relief she sought and won. See 28
 U.S.C. § 1292(d)(4)(B) (“If an appeal is taken from the dis-
 trict court’s grant or denial of the motion, proceedings shall
 be further stayed until the appeal has been decided by
 [us].”). Regardless, because Ms. Armstrong prevailed be-
 low, we dismiss her appeal of the district court’s transfer
 order.
Case: 21-2141        Document: 15    Page: 3   Filed: 12/15/2021

 ARMSTRONG   v. US                                           3

     To avoid further delaying the transfer, we order that
 the mandate issue concurrently with this dismissal. See
 FED. R. APP. P. 41(b). Accordingly, the stay is lifted, and
 the district court may now transfer Ms. Armstrong’s claim
 to the Claims Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1292(d)(4)(B).
                          DISMISSED
                             COSTS
 No costs.