N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
TIFFANY BUFORD,
Appellant
v.
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE,
Appellee
2024-2254
Appeal from the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals in
No. 8007-RELO, Administrative Judge Jonathan D. Zis-
chkau.
ON MOTION
The case caption as the opinion prints it. Every word is kept; only a line that is nothing but a drawn rule is left out.
Before DYK, CUNNINGHAM, and STARK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
O R D E R
Tiffany Buford appeals from the United States Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, which denied her claim for reimbursement of relocation expenses. Responding to this court’s November 1, 2024 show cause order, the Secretary
of the Air Force argues for dismissal, and Ms. Buford urges the court to retain jurisdiction.
This court’s jurisdiction over decisions of “agency board[s] of contract appeals” is limited to “final decision[s]” made “pursuant to section 7107(a)(1) of title 41.” 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(10). We have long held that “only Board decisions on contract claims covered by the Contract Disputes Act, are within (what is now) section 7107(a)(1)’s reference to a ‘decision of an agency board.’” See Sheridan Transp. Sys., Inc. v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 651 F. App’x 987, 988 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (collecting cases). Here, Ms. Buford is attempting to appeal a Board decision on a claim under 31 U.S.C. § 3702(a)(3) for civilian employee federal travel claims. Because such decision is not a decision within § 7107(a)(1), and therefore outside this court’s review authority under § 1295(a)(10), we dismiss. Accordingly,
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
(1) The appeal is dismissed.
No party here has asked this court to transfer this case under 28 U.S.C. § 1631, and the court takes no position here on whether the United States Court of Federal Claims or a United States District Court would have jurisdiction over a complaint filed by Ms. Buford seeking reimbursement of travel expenses.
(2) All pending motions are denied.
(3) Each party shall bear its own costs.
January 10, 2025
Date
F OR THE COURT
This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the court's own document in Tiffany Buford v. Sec'y of the Air Force. Nothing is summarized or reworded, and the sections run in the order the court wrote them. One thing the page shows is not repeated in the text: the pagination furniture, which is the page numbers, the docket footer and the electronic filing stamp printed across the top of each page.