Lucy E. Woolfolk, Petitioner, v. Department of the Army, Respondent, 883 F.2d 1027 (Fed. Cir. 1989)

DECISION

The decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board (board), SL07528810307, dismissing the appeal of Lucy E. Woolfolk for lack of jurisdiction, is affirmed.

OPINION

The settlement agreement executed by the parties renders the case moot and forecloses this court from obtaining jurisdiction. Gould v. Control Laser Corp., 866 F.2d 1391, 1395, 9 USPQ2d 1718, 1721 (Fed. Cir. 1989). "One who attacks a settlement must bear the burden of showing that the contract he has made is tainted with invalidity, either by fraud practiced upon him or by a mutual mistake under which both parties acted." Asberry v. United States Postal Service, 692 F.2d 1378, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 1982) (quoting Callen v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 332 U.S. 625, 630 (1948)). Ms. Woolfolk has not met this burden, and therefore the board's dismissal of the appeal was not arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; obtained without procedures required by law, rule, or regulation having been followed; or unsupported by substantial evidence. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(c); Hayes v. Department of the Navy, 727 F.2d 1535, 1537 (Fed. Cir. 1984).