Johnson v. United States

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2023 · Evidence

75 F.4th 1354 (2023)

Updated July 19, 2026

evidencemilitary administrative lawstatutory and regulatory interpretationActive Reserve ProgramIndividual Ready ReservePCS ordersRE-3O reenlistment codepage 11

Facts

Johnson was a Career Designated Marine in the Marine Corps Active Reserve Program and, in 2013, received PCS orders relocating him from Virginia Beach to Phoenix for a 36-month recruiting assignment. Because the assignment extended beyond his remaining obligated active service, he would have needed to extend or reenlist, but he refused to execute the orders and remained in Virginia Beach after unsuccessfully seeking a change based on family hardship. He was counseled that refusing the orders would have administrative consequences, then signed a page 11 form stating he would not reenlist or extend to comply with PCS orders and was being assigned RE-3O. He was transferred out of the Active Reserve Program and into the Individual Ready Reserve and received a DD Form 214 reflecting release from active duty and the RE-3O code.

Issue

Whether a Career Designated Marine who refused to extend or reenlist to execute PCS orders was entitled to greater notice and a separation board before being released from the Active Reserve Program and transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve. More specifically, the question was whether the cited provisions of the Marine Corps Separation Manual required procedures beyond the page 11 notice, DD Form 214, and transfer to the IRR.

Rule

When a Career enlisted Marine refuses to extend or reenlist in order to execute PCS orders, the governing authorities cited by the court—Marine Corps Order 1300.8R ¶ 1102, Marine Administrative Message 552/12, and Marine Corps Separation Manual 1005 ¶ 3—authorize release from the Active Reserve Program and transfer to the IRR with a page 11 entry and RE-3O reenlistment code, not discharge, and do not require additional notice or a separation board. Separation-board procedures in Separation Manual ¶ 6303 apply only where that paragraph is made applicable, and not every separation under the Manual triggers such procedures.

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Staff Sergeant Nolan Pierce is a Career Designated Marine in the Active Reserve Program stationed in Columbus, Ohio. He receives PCS orders to San Diego for a 36-month assignment that would require him to extend his obligated service, refuses to do so, signs a page 11 entry reflecting RE-3O, and is transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve.

Pierce sues, arguing that because chapter 6 of the Separation Manual governs administrative separations before completion of obligated service, he was automatically entitled to a separation board. What is the best answer?

Explanation. The majority held that when a Career enlisted or Career Designated Marine refuses to extend or reenlist to execute PCS orders, the governing specific authorities authorize release from the Active Reserve Program and transfer to the IRR with a page 11 entry and RE-3O code. The court rejected the view that every separation under the Separation Manual automatically triggers chapter 6 separation-board procedures.