UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT


                      CHARLES M. TATELBAUM,
                 Assignee for the benefit of the
              creditors of A. Hoen & Company, Inc.,
                            Appellant

                               v.

                       The United States,
                            Appellee

                           No. 84-1046


749 F.2d 729

Alan M. Grochal, Melnicove, Kaufman, Weiner & Smouse, P.A., of
Baltimore, Maryland, argued for appellant.  With him on the brief
was Thomas C. Wheeler, Pettit & Martin, of Washington, D.C., of
counsel.

Stephen R. Bergenholtz, Department of Justice, of Washington,
D.C., argued for appellee.  With him on the brief were Richard K.
Willard, Acting Assistant Attorney General, David M. Cohen,
Director and Sandra P. Spooner.

Bennett, Miller, and Smith, Circuit Judges.

BENNETT, Circuit Judge.


                             OPINION

Charles M. Tatelbaum, assignee for the benefit of the creditors
of A. Hoen & Company, Inc. (Hoen), appeals the decision of the
United States Government Printing Office Board of Contract
Appeals, Panel 9-82 (October 21, 1983), sustaining the Government
Printing Office's (GPO) setoff of amounts owed to GPO by Hoen on
two defaulted contracts against amounts which GPO owed to Hoen on
two unrelated completed contracts.  Pursuant to Federal Rule of
Appellate Procedure 27, the United States moves this court to
dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.  In his opposition
to the motion of the United States to dismiss, Tatelbaum requests
this court to transfer the instant appeal to the appropriate
court, rather than dismiss it.  The government did not object to
this request in oral argument.  We lack jurisdiction to hear this
appeal.  Accordingly, we transfer the instant appeal to the
United States Claims Court, assuming, without deciding, that it
has jurisdiction under the Tucker Act.  See 28 U.S.C.  1491
(1982).

GPO awarded Hoen five contracts during 1979 and 1980.  Of the
four contracts which are relevant to this appeal, Hoen had
completed two and had partially completed the other two when it
ceased its business on April 10, 1981.  On April 15, 1981, GPO
terminated the five contracts for default due to Hoen's inability
to perform.  On April 16, 1981, the Circuit Court of Baltimore
City declared Hoen insolvent, assumed jurisdiction over the Hoen
estate, and appointed Tatelbaum and Edward F. Shea, Jr.,
assignees.  After reprocuring the two uncompleted contracts, GPO
set off the excess costs which it had incurred ($122,702.38)
against the amount which it owed Hoen on the four contracts
($98,460.45).  Tatelbaum argues that the United States has thus
received impermissible preferred treatment over Hoen's other
creditors by extending the setoff of the $34,030.79 which it owed
Hoen on two completed contracts.

A prerequisite to this court assuming jurisdiction over an appeal
from a decision of a board of contract appeals is that the
decision by the board must be pursuant to the Contract Disputes
Act of 1978, 41 U.S.C.  607(g)(1) (1982). 28 U.S.C.  1295(a)
(10); North American Corp. v. United States, 706 F.2d 1212 (Fed.
Cir. 1983). The Contract Disputes Act only applies to contracts
of an "executive agency." 41 U.S.C.  602. GPO does not fall
within the 41 U.S.C.  601(2) definition of an "executive
agency." See International Graphics v. United States, 4 Cl. Ct.
186, 197 (1983). Because GPO is not an "executive agency" within
the meaning of the Contract Disputes Act we are without
jurisdiction to decide this appeal.  Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 
1631, we transfer this case to the United States Claims Court.

TRANSFERRED

December 11, 1984