Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Simon A. Soto, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. United States
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 2022-2011 · judgment February 12, 2024
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
This case determines whether thousands of medically retired combat veterans should receive all the combat related special compensation (CRSC) that Congress specifically authorized for combat veterans. The government has elected to calculate the period of retroactive compensation due using the procedure in the Barring Act (31 U.S.C. § 3702) instead of the one in the CRSC statute (10 U.S.C. § 1413a)-a maneuver that allows the government to apply the Barring Act's six- year limitations period in order to pay the veterans less. But the Barring Act is a default provision and does not apply where "another law" provides a procedure for calculating the amount due-that is, for "settling" a demand for payment. Although this Court's precedent defines "settlement" of demands for payment from the federal government as "the administrative determination of the amount due," it has not decided the test for whether a statute provides a settlement procedure that should apply in place of the Barring Act. And agency practice more broadly-which aligns with the test the District Court articulated and is consistent with this Court's definition of "settlement"-is irreconcilable with the novel test that the Federal Circuit applied, although both tests claim reliance on this Court's definition of "settlement." The question presented is: When a person makes a demand for money from the federal government pursuant to federal statute, what test should courts and agencies use to determine whether that statute includes a settlement procedure that displaces the default procedures and limitations set forth in the Barring Act (31 U.S.C. § 3702)? GRANTED LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: GIVEN THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT'S HOLDING THAT A CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION UNDER 10 U. S. C. §1413a IS A CLAIM "INVOLVING ... RETIRED PAY" UNDER 31 U. S. C. §3702(a)(1) (A), DOES 10 U. S. C. §1413a PROVIDE A SETTLEMENT MECHANISM THAT DISPLACES THE DEFAULT PROCEDURES AND LIMITATIONS SET FORTH IN THE BARRING ACT?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Johnnet Simone Jones
Sidley Austin LLP
For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences
Amicus briefs
1 cert-stage · 3 merits
(3 supporting pet./neither)
Argument & decision
Argued April 28, 2025 — Tacy F. Flint · Caroline A. Flynn. Audio and transcript
Decided June 12, 2025. Opinion by Thomas.
Proceedings
- Jul 14 2025Judgment Issued.
- Jun 12 2025Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
- Apr 28 2025Argued. For petitioner: Tacy F. Flint, Chicago, Ill. For respondent: Caroline A. Flynn, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
- Apr 18 2025Reply of petitioner Simon A. Soto filed. (Distributed)
- Apr 02 2025Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 19 2025CIRCULATED
- Mar 10 2025Brief amici curiae of Connecticut Veterans Legal Center, et al. filed.
- Mar 10 2025Brief amici curiae of Military-Veterans Advocacy, Inc. and Disabled American Veterans filed.
- Mar 10 2025Brief amicus curiae of National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium filed.
- Mar 03 2025Record received from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The record is electronic and is available on PACER.
- Mar 03 2025Brief of petitioner Simon A. Soto filed.
- Mar 03 2025Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
- Feb 28 2025Record requested from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
- Feb 24 2025SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, April 28, 2025.
- Jan 17 2025Petition GRANTED limited to the following Question: Given the Federal Circuit's holding that a claim for compensation under 10 U. S. C. §1413a is a claim "involving ... retired pay" under 31 U. S. C. §3702(a)(l)(A), does 10 U. S. C. §1413a provide a settlement mechanism that displaces the default procedures and limitations set forth in the Barring Act?
- Jan 13 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/17/2025.
- Dec 04 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2025.
- Dec 03 2024Reply of petitioner Simon A. Soto filed. (Dec.10, 2024) (Distributed)
- Nov 20 2024Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
- Oct 21 2024Brief amicus curiae of National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium filed.
- Oct 17 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 20, 2024.
- Oct 16 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 21, 2024 to November 20, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
- Sep 18 2024Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 21, 2024)