Background
Turner Myer III sought judicial review of a decision by the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records. His lawsuit, filed in the Eastern District of Texas in March 2019, was transferred first to the District of Columbia and ultimately to the Court of Federal Claims.
The Court of Federal Claims ordered Myer to file a transfer or amended complaint that complied with RCFC 3.1. After resolving a delivery problem, the court extended the deadline twice and repeatedly warned Myer that noncompliance would result in dismissal under RCFC 41(b). When Myer failed to file the required complaint by the final deadline, the court dismissed the action for failure to prosecute.
The Court’s Holding
The Federal Circuit affirmed in a nonprecedential per curiam opinion. Applying abuse-of-discretion review, the panel held that dismissal for failure to prosecute was within the trial court’s discretion because Myer repeatedly failed to submit the required document despite multiple orders, extensions, and warnings.
Myer’s appellate briefing addressed the merits of his underlying claims concerning his Air Force discharge and alleged discrimination, but he did not dispute the stated basis for dismissal or identify error in the Court of Federal Claims’ failure-to-prosecute ruling. The Federal Circuit found his remaining arguments unpersuasive and awarded no costs.
Key Takeaways
- A trial court may dismiss an action under RCFC 41(b) when a plaintiff fails to prosecute or comply with court orders.
- Repeated extensions and explicit warnings supported the Court of Federal Claims’ exercise of discretion.
- Arguments about the underlying merits did not establish error in the procedural dismissal.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that litigants, including those proceeding without counsel, must comply with filing requirements and court-imposed deadlines. On appeal, challenging the merits of the underlying dispute will not substitute for addressing the procedural ground on which the case was dismissed.