similarly situated with other city employees); Clark v. United States, 691 F.2d 837 (7th Cir. 1982) (pensioners among state and private pension plans not similarly situated with federal pensioners). Here, Weisgerber’s proposed class of similarly situated persons includes employees who are eligible for disparate retirement plans under state law. KPERS participants are eligible for defined benefit retirement plans, whereas the other public employees identified by Weisgerber are not eligible for defined benefit plans but instead have tax sheltered annuity plans; this distinction alone destroys any similarity across the purported class and poses an insurmountable hurdle for Weisgerber’s equal protection claim. See Ganley v. Minneapolis Park and Recreation Bd., 491 F.3d 743 (8th Cir. 2007) (<HOLDING>). We have analyzed in more detail the inherent
holding equal protection under the federal constitution applies to similarly situated persons holding that an equal protection violation may occur when similarly situated persons are not treated equally under the law quotation marks omitted holding members of two distinct pension plans were not similarly situated for equal protection analysis holding that potential class members are similarly situated to the named plaintiffs if they are similarly situated with respect to their job requirements and pay provisions holding that a presentence defendant is not similarly situated with a postsentence convict and denial of sentence credit does not violate equal protection