Category: USPHS

Quick Update: Shutdown Puts Military, Retiree Pay at Risk and USPHS/NOAA Survivors Are Vulnerable

Posted on by Becky Haugen

Shutdown Puts Military, Retiree Pay at Risk — and USPHS/NOAA Survivors Are Still Vulnerable

Washington, DC – October 26, 2025
A recent warning from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent underscores the dire stakes of the ongoing U.S. federal government shutdown. Military personnel may begin missing paychecks as early as November 15 if funding remains unresolved. (United Press International)

While active-duty forces are immediately in the spotlight, this looming threat further highlights a critical but often-overlooked gap: the retirement and survivor payments for USPHS and NOAA officers and their families. Unlike active employees designated “excepted,” many retirees and survivor beneficiaries are not shielded by temporary funding fixes, legislative stopgaps or re-programmed appropriations.

Why This Matters — Now

  • The shutdown’s ripple effects on military pay demonstrate how quickly budget lapses translate into real financial risk.
  • USPHS/NOAA retirees and survivor beneficiaries, who depend on standing entitlements, remain at risk because they are not always included in emergency appropriations measures nor covered by the same protections afforded to active-duty pay.
  • The class action effort being advanced by the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC is timelier than ever, particularly given the expanded visibility of funding vulnerabilities across the uniformed services.

“When the nation’s protectors and public-health officers are suddenly unsure if their next check will arrive, it’s not only a financial disruption, it’s a breach of trust,” said David P. Sheldon, founding partner of the firm. “Our class-action is built to ensure that those who served do not become collateral damage in a political shutdown.”

What You Can Do

If you are a USPHS or NOAA retiree, a surviving spouse or family member, or know someone who is concerned about delayed or interrupted benefit payments, we encourage you to reach out:

📞 Call: 202-546-9575
💻 Contact us via: militarydefense.com/contact-us

Your involvement can help shape the class action and amplify efforts to secure protections that must cover retirees and survivors, not just currently serving officers.

David P. Sheldon, PLLC Pursuing Class Action to Protect NOAA and U.S. Public Health Service Retirees and Families

Posted on by Becky Haugen

Senior Attorneys Annie Morgan and Dylan Thayer of The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, intend to prepare a class action lawsuit on behalf of retirees and surviving family members of the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) who may face interruptions in their retirement or survivor benefit payments during a federal government shutdown.

If you or a loved one is a retired officer or survivor who has experienced or is at risk of delayed or withheld payments, we would like to hear from you. Your participation may help hold the government accountable and ensure permanent protection for those who served their nation honorably.

About the Case

Given funding lapses, USPHS and NOAA retirees and survivors will likely be exclude from payment while other federal and uniformed service members will continue to receive compensation. Although current legislative proposals—such as Sen. Ron Johnson’s “Shutdown Fairness Act” (S.3012)—would extend pay to certain active-duty and excepted employees, they, again, fail to protect retired officers and survivor beneficiaries.

This disparity leaves thousands of former officers and their families vulnerable to missed payments, despite their years of service and contributions to public health, environmental protection, and national readiness. The class action seeks a judicial remedy to establish that these payments are vested entitlements, not discretionary appropriations subject to political impasse.

“Our firm believes that no retiree or widow should ever wonder whether their next paycheck will arrive,” said David P. Sheldon, principal attorney. “These officers dedicated their lives to service—often in hardship tours and public emergencies. Their benefits should be guaranteed, regardless of Washington gridlock.”

Why Work with The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC

David P. Sheldon, PLLC has earned national recognition representing service members, retirees, and federal employees in complex military and federal law cases, including matters before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, federal district courts, and Boards for Correction of Military Records.

The firm’s attorneys have successfully advanced class and individual actions to restore benefits, correct pay injustices, and protect due process rights across every uniformed service—Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, NOAA, and USPHS.

With decades of combined experience and a results-driven record, the firm’s attorneys bring both strategic litigation experience and deep institutional knowledge of military and federal employment law.

Contact Us

If you are a USPHS or NOAA retiree, a surviving spouse, or know someone who has been impacted, we invite you to contact our firm to discuss your eligibility for participation in this class action.

Call: 202-546-9575
Contact: militarydefense.com/contact-us

Your involvement can help ensure that the government upholds its commitments to those who served and defended the public.

 Share This Announcement

Help spread the word to NOAA and USPHS retirees and families who may be affected by these funding gaps. Together, we can safeguard the rights of those who have safeguarded our nation.

Pending Legal Action: USPHS and NOAA Retirees Left Without Pay During Government Shutdown

Posted on by Becky Haugen

Pending Legal Action: USPHS and NOAA Retirees Left Without Pay During Government Shutdown

Washington, D.C. — October 15, 2025

The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, is examining the legal basis for a class action lawsuit on behalf of retired officers and annuitants of the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) who may not receive their retirement pay during the ongoing federal government shutdown.

While most uniformed service retirees—including those from the Department of Defense (“DoD”) and the Coast Guard—will continue to receive their earned retirement benefits through the Military Retirement Fund (“MRF”), USPHS and NOAA retirees are excluded from that system. Their payments are instead drawn from agency-specific discretionary appropriations, which halt when Congress fails to pass a continuing resolution or budget.

This funding disparity leaves USPHS and NOAA retirees vulnerable to the political process, despite their equal standing as uniformed service members under federal law (10 U.S.C. § 101(a)(4)). The claims would potentially be subject to review in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and would challenge this inequity and seek both immediate restoration of withheld pay. and a declaratory judgment establishing that these retirees’ benefits are mandatory entitlements protected from budgetary suspension.

“No retiree should lose pay simply because their service fell under a different department seal,” said David P. Sheldon, founding attorney. “These men and women served under the flag of the United States just like their DoD and Coast Guard counterparts—and the government’s inaction has real human consequences.”

Who Is Affected

  • Included: Retirees and annuitants of the USPHS and NOAA Commissioned Corps who did not receive their scheduled retirement or survivor payments during the shutdown period.
  • Not Included: Retirees of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Space Force, and Coast Guard, whose payments are statutorily protected through the MRF.
  • Potential Expansion: Federal civilian retirees may be affected indirectly but are not part of this pending action.

Legal Recourse for Affected Retirees

Eligible retirees may pursue the following avenues of relief:

  1. Class Participation:
    Retirees who have experienced nonpayment of retirement benefits may seek inclusion in the pending class action once filed. The case will argue that USPHS and NOAA retirement pay statutes (42 U.S.C. § 212, § 213a; 33 U.S.C. § 853) are money-mandating under the Tucker Act (28 U.S.C. § 1491), giving the U.S. Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction to order payment and interest.
  2. Administrative Inquiry:
    Retirees should retain all correspondence and payment statements from the Coast Guard Pay & Personnel Center (PPC), which processes payments for USPHS and NOAA retirees. Written confirmation of nonpayment or delayed disbursement strengthens future claims.
  3. Individual Filing (Optional):
    Some retirees may choose to file an individual claim or mandamus petition if they experience unique financial hardship or are excluded from the class definition. Such cases may also assert violations of the Anti-Deficiency Act and Equal Protection principles under the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.
  4. Legislative Advocacy:
    In parallel, affected retirees may contact congressional representatives to urge the adoption of a statutory parity amendment—similar to the FY 2021 NDAA inclusion of the Coast Guard in the MRF—that would permanently protect retirement pay for USPHS and NOAA retirees.

Legal Background

The Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S.C. § 1341) prohibits the government from obligating funds not yet appropriated. However, mandatory entitlements such as Social Security and MRF-based military pensions continue during shutdowns because Congress has permanently appropriated those funds.
USPHS and NOAA retirees fall into a legal gap: their authorizing statutes require that pay “shall be paid,” but Congress never created a corresponding permanent appropriation. As a result, the agencies’ payment authority vanishes when appropriations lapse—despite statutory entitlement.

The forthcoming lawsuit will argue that “shall be paid” imposes a nondiscretionary duty, making retirement pay an obligation of the United States independent of annual funding. The government’s failure to pay, therefore, constitutes an unlawful withholding of compensation earned through federal service.

Statement from Counsel

“Congress has recognized eight uniformed services, not five branches and three exceptions,” said Annie Morgan, senior military defense counsel. “Parity must mean protection. If one uniformed retiree is paid during a shutdown, all should be.”

How to Get Involved

Retirees or survivors of the USPHS or NOAA Commissioned Corps who have missed or delayed payments due to the shutdown are encouraged to contact The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC at militarydefense.com for updates on the case and guidance on preserving their claims.

Disclaimer

This post is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship. The lawsuit described herein has not yet been filed. Individuals should seek personalized legal guidance regarding their eligibility and options.

 

OPINION: Silencing Women in Service Weakens America’s Strength

Posted on by Becky Haugen

Image adapted from the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS), U.S. Department of Defense, 2013 DACOWITS Report (public domain).

OPINION: Silencing Women in Service Weakens America’s Strength

By the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC

A Step Backward

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s decision to shut down the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS) is not just about ending an advisory group. It is part of a broader push to reshape the image of the military under a narrow “warrior ethos.” In doing so, it risks violating the rights of service members and weakening national security.

For nearly 75 years, DACOWITS gave women in uniform a voice inside the Pentagon, flagging problems with equipment, training, health care, and readiness. Its closure silences that voice. Even more troubling, it signals a willingness to roll back decades of progress where women have earned the right, through law and sacrifice, to serve in every capacity, including combat.

And this was not theoretical progress. DACOWITS directly shaped the military’s ability to function effectively. As of 2025, approximately 94% of DACOWITS recommendations have been either fully or partially adopted by the Department of Defense since its creation in 1951. Those changes, from equipment design to personnel policies, had real, measurable impacts on readiness and national security. Closing the committee risks losing a proven engine of reform.

The Legal Reality

Hegseth does not have the legal power to remove women from combat or other positions simply because of their sex. Congress repealed combat-exclusion laws years ago, and the Supreme Court has made clear that discrimination based on gender requires an “exceedingly persuasive justification.” Any attempt to bar women would trigger immediate lawsuits and constitutional challenges under the Fifth Amendment’s equal-protection guarantee.

Uniformed service members—whether Army, Navy, Space Force, NOAA, or the U.S. Public Health Service—fall under Title 10. That means their rights are protected by federal law, and any blanket policy to exclude them based on sex would be unlawful.

Security Consequences

This is more than a legal fight. Removing women from full participation in service threatens national security. Research consistently shows that diverse teams perform better, especially in complex missions overseas and at home. By closing down advisory committees and silencing voices, the Pentagon narrows its talent pool at a time when recruiting and retention are already at crisis levels.

For non-armed services like the USPHS and NOAA, which often deploy alongside the military in disaster zones or global health missions, the chilling effect is real. Labeling inclusion efforts as “woke” undermines critical coordination and risks sidelining officers who are already vital to national response efforts.

A Dangerous Precedent

Beyond the issue of gender, the new directive restricting service members’ ability to speak at outside events and panels further shortens the lines of communication between the Pentagon and the public. When commanders control not just operations but also outside speech, transparency suffers. Service members—military, federal, or Tribal—are left with fewer avenues to raise concerns, seek reforms, or expose wrongdoing.

The Path Forward

Commanders and service members who find themselves targeted by discriminatory policies are not without recourse. They can:

  • File Equal Opportunity complaints
  • Pursue Inspector General investigations
  • Petition their respective Boards for Correction of Military or Naval Records (ABCMR, BCNR, etc.)
  • Seek judicial review where appropriate

Our firm stands ready to defend these rights. Title 10 protections apply across the spectrum of uniformed service, and no secretary can erase them by memo.

Conclusion

Rolling back opportunities for women under the guise of “readiness” is both unlawful and unwise. America is strongest when all who are willing and able to serve are judged on merit, not gender. Shuttering transparency and silencing voices threatens readiness, justice, and the very values the military and federal service are sworn to uphold.

References, Resources & Citations

  • Politico, Hegseth shutters Pentagon women’s advisory group, clamps down on outside appearances (Sept. 2025) Politico
  • Hegseth dissolves women’s military committee over ‘divisive feminist agenda’ (The Guardian, Sept 23 2025) The Guardian
  • Hegseth ‘proudly’ terminates Women, Peace, and Security program supported by Trump (Washington Post, Apr 2025) Center for Strategic and International Studies, Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 and DoD Implementation (2017–2024 reports) Washington Post
  • Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security (GIWPS), commentary on WPS strategy rollbacks (2025) GIWPS
  • Department of Homeland Security Report on the Implementation of the Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) Act (2022) DHS
  • Department of State Implementation Plan for the U.S. Strategy on Women, Peace, and Security Department of State
  • Women, Peace and Security: Strategic Framework and Implementation Plan (DoD, 2020) Policy Brief
  • Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 (Public Law 115-68) Congress
  • DACOWITS Annual Reports to the Secretary of Defense (archival, 1951–2024) DACOWITS
  • Title 10, U.S. Code, governing armed and uniformed services Cornell
  • Department of Defense Inspector General and GAO reports on military recruiting and readiness (2023–2025) GAO Readiness Reports

 

Two USPHS Officers File Federal Lawsuits Against HHS Secretary and PHS Correction Board Over Promotion Delays

Posted on by Becky Haugen

USPHS Justice

Two United States Public Health Service (USPHS) Lieutenant Commanders have filed separate lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Board for Correction of PHS Commissioned Corps Records (PHS BFC).

Both officers allege that federal officials unlawfully denied their applications to correct their service records after policy changes extended their eligibility for promotion to Commander (O-5) by several years. Each argues that their cases were never reviewed by a legally required “board of civilians,” as mandated by 10 U.S.C. § 1552 and Public Health Service regulations.

According to the complaints, the PHS BFC improperly delegated decisions to its Executive Secretary, board staff, and HHS Office of General Counsel—bypassing impartial civilian review. The lawsuits assert that these actions were “arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law,” in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 706 (2)(A).

Both officers, who joined the USPHS with strong service records and early promotions to Lieutenant Commander, claim that the 2024 policy revision to CCI 331.01 unlawfully pushed back their next promotion eligibility to 2029. They seek judicial relief to restore their original 2026 promotion opportunities and recover back pay and allowances.

According to the officer’s attorney Dylan Thayer, “Our clients dedicated themselves to the mission of the Public Health Service, stepping forward in times of crisis and fulfilling their duty with distinction. Yet when they sought fair review of their records, they were denied the very protections Congress guaranteed through impartial civilian oversight. These lawsuits are not just about promotions, they are about accountability, fairness, and ensuring that those who serve our nation receive the justice they are entitled to under the law.”

The lawsuits, filed by the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, highlight broader concerns about fairness, oversight, and due process in military and uniformed service correction boards, which by statute must provide impartial civilian review.

About the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC

The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, based in Washington, D.C., represents service members, veterans, and federal employees worldwide in military justice, administrative law, corrections of records, and federal employment disputes. The firm is recognized nationally for defending the rights of those who serve.

Disclaimer

This press release is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case is unique, and prior results do not guarantee future outcomes.

USPHS Commander Seeks Correction of Records After Disputed Reprimand and Denial of Relief by Surgeon General

Posted on by Becky Haugen

A U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) Commander is fighting to restore the officer’s reputation and career following a reprimand, contending it was unjust, retaliatory, and issued outside the bounds of lawful authority. The case, filed with the Board for Correction of Public Health Service Commissioned Corps Records (BCMR), argues that the Letter of Reprimand (LOR) issued in October 2023, was procedurally and legally flawed.

Represented by attorney Annie Morgan of the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, the Commander’s filing asserts that the LOR was issued not only in violation of Commissioned Corps policy (CCI 211.04 and CCI 211.07) but was also motivated by retaliation after the officer raised concerns about understaffing and promotion irregularities within the Bureau of Health Services at the Eloy Detention Center.

According to the complaint, the officer formally requested relief through the Surgeon General’s redress process, submitting evidence of improper conduct, lack of authority by the issuing official, and violations of due process. But the Surgeon General, VADM Vivek Murthy, ultimately declined to grant relief, stating that “the evidence presented does not demonstrate a violation of law, executive order, regulation, or policy,” nor was the issuance “arbitrary and capricious.”

Attorney Morgan disputes this finding. “The facts clearly show that the reprimand was issued by someone without the lawful authority to do so. It followed weeks of the Commander raising staffing concerns and requesting help. Instead of support, the officer was punished for performing the duties assigned—and that’s precisely why the BCMR exists: to correct these injustices,” said Morgan.

The Commander’s petition to the BCMR requests:

  • Rescission of the LOR;
  • Expungement from the officer’s official record;
  • Restoration of lost specialty pay and backpay; and,
  • Any other equitable relief the Board finds appropriate.

The filing includes legal arguments grounded in the Administrative Procedure Act, Privacy Act, and internal USPHS regulations. The Commander also provided documentation showing that the decisions regarding patient scheduling were consistent with operational policy during a staffing shortfall—not acts of misconduct.

The case represents a broader concern for many USPHS officers navigating opaque disciplinary procedures that can derail careers, especially when whistleblowing or reporting internal issues.

About the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC:
Located in Washington, D.C., the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC is a premier military and federal employment law firm. With more than two decades of experience, the firm defends service members and federal employees in cases involving courts-martial, administrative separations, security clearances, and record corrections.

Disclaimer:
This release is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Each case is unique, and outcomes will vary depending on specific facts and circumstances.

A Promising Career Delayed: PHS Officer Seeks Correction After Mischaracterized Interservice Transfer

Posted on by Becky Haugen

A decorated officer in the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) Commissioned Corps is seeking a correction to her military records after discovering that years of prior service in the U.S. Army have been excluded from her promotion timeline due to a mischaracterized transfer process. Represented by Attorney Dylan Thayer of the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, the officer has filed a formal application to the Board for Correction of PHS Commissioned Corps Records.

This case centers around a troubling bureaucratic failure: despite receiving multiple assurances from PHS officials that her five years of active-duty Army service would be recognized under an interservice transfer, the officer was later told that her commissioning into the PHS was processed as a direct appointment, rendering her previous rank and time in service irrelevant for promotion eligibility.

“When an officer makes career-defining decisions based on guidance from the very institution that recruits them, the burden to correct misinformation should not fall on the officer alone,” said Attorney Thayer. “We are asking for the recognition of service she has already rendered with distinction.”

The officer had served honorably as an Army psychologist and was selected for promotion to Major (O-4) before joining the PHS. She accepted her commission believing her time in service would count toward her next promotion. Only after repeated follow-ups did she discover that her file reflected a promotion eligibility date nearly three years later than expected.

This misclassification has real-world consequences. Without correction, it not only delays her promotion and financial compensation but may also impede future career advancement.

In her role at the Department of Defense, she has excelled by taking on supervisory duties typically assigned to more senior officers, earning a PHS Commendation Medal, and receiving nomination for a prestigious clinician award. Yet her official rank does not reflect this performance, due to what her legal team describes as administrative negligence.

The filing requests her immediate eligibility for promotion to Lieutenant Commander (O-4), retroactive to her accession date, along with corresponding backpay. In the alternative, the officer seeks compensation equal to the accession bonus she would have received had she been correctly classified.

“This case is not just about one officer,” Thayer emphasized. “It’s about setting a precedent to ensure that no service member is penalized for trusting the system. We expect accountability, clarity, and fairness for those who dedicate their lives to service.”

About the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC
The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, based in Washington, D.C., is a nationally recognized firm that defends the rights of uniformed service members and federal employees. With decades of experience in courts-martial, promotion disputes, medical board appeals, and security clearance litigation, the firm is committed to ensuring justice for those who serve.

Disclaimer:
This press release is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Past outcomes do not guarantee future results. For personalized legal assistance, please contact an attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction.

 

Public Health Service Physician’s Journey from Ebola Response to Reprimand Spurs Fight for Justice

Posted on by Becky Haugen

A decorated physician in the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) is seeking justice after being reprimanded and denied promotion due to administrative readiness lapses that occurred while he was serving in a civilian residency during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Commissioned since 2012, the officer began his career as a pharmacist before attending medical school at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USUHS). His service includes deployment to Liberia during the West African Ebola outbreak, where he contributed to the nation’s public health mission on the front lines of a global crisis. After graduating from medical school in 2020, he completed a rigorous three-year Family Medicine residency, all while the world faced the strain of a pandemic.

Despite his unwavering commitment, 2023 brought a blow: the Commissioned Corps issued a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) citing failure to maintain readiness requirements. The reprimand was based on administrative errors, missed documentation uploads, not actual medical or physical shortcomings. At the time, the officer was in a non-deployable, civilian training program, under the belief that readiness standards did not apply during residency.

“That period was one of the most intense and formative chapters of my life,” said the physician. “I was balancing pandemic care, 80-hour weeks, and professional growth, believing I was doing everything expected of me to become a better provider for underserved communities.”

Now a board-certified Family Medicine doctor working with the Indian Health Service, he faces long-term career consequences. Because of the reprimand, he was removed from promotion eligibility through 2027 and threatened with involuntary separation unless he resigned. Resignation would trigger a penalty under his Commissioned Service Obligation, costing him an estimated 1 million dollars.

His request for correction, now under review by the Board for Correction of USPHS Records, seeks to remove the reprimand, restore promotion eligibility, and grant back pay. The argument is clear: USPHS policy does not apply readiness standards to officers in training, and the reprimand represents both a legal error and a deep injustice.

Represented by Senior Military Attorney Annie Morgan of the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, the physician has laid out a strong case for administrative relief, supported by internal correspondence, legal precedent, and a consistent record of exemplary service.

“This isn’t about evading responsibility, it’s about recognizing when rules are misapplied and good service members are unfairly penalized,” said the officer. “I’m still here, still serving, and still committed. I just want the chance to do so without this shadow over my record.”

About the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC

The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, based in Washington, D.C., is nationally recognized for representing military and federal personnel in correction of records, promotion denials, discharge upgrades, and other matters of military justice and administrative law.

Disclaimer

This press release is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Outcomes vary based on specific facts and legal circumstances. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

Veteran USPHS Officer Challenges Unlawful Denial of Career-Defining Benefits in Federal Court

Posted on by Becky Haugen

A decorated officer of the United States Public Health Service (USPHS), with over three decades of distinguished service across multiple branches of the U.S. Armed Forces, has filed a federal lawsuit alleging that bureaucratic failures and unlawful actions within the Department of Health and Human Services unjustly derailed his career, denied him a well-earned promotion to the rank of Captain, and significantly reduced his retirement benefits.

The legal action, filed today in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, seeks judicial review of the USPHS Board for Correction’s refusal to credit six months of volunteer hospice work toward the officer’s Training and Education (TED) credit, a critical factor in determining initial rank, career trajectory, and eligibility for timely promotion. Despite multiple requests dating back to 2005 and a detailed appeal filed in 2022, the Board rejected his application as “untimely” and unsupported, ignoring compelling new evidence and legal arguments. His reconsideration request was also summarily denied in less than 24 hours by a contractor who lacked legal authority to issue such a decision.

“This is a case of clear legal error compounded by procedural miscues,” said Dylan Thayer, lead counsel from the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, based in Washington, D.C. “Our client was misinformed by USPHS officials at the time of his recommissioning. Because of that bad advice, he was brought in at too low a rank, which permanently altered his promotion timeline and ultimately cost him a Captain’s commission. To make matters worse, the agency then ignored its own precedent, denied reconsideration through improper channels, and turned a blind eye to its own regulations.”

The plaintiff, who served in the Navy, Army National Guard, and USPHS, had consistently received superior performance evaluations and was nominated for commendations, including for his role in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic. His lawsuit cites violations of federal administrative law, including the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. § 706), and challenges the Board’s refusal to even consider the similarities between his case and a prior Board ruling (PHS BCMR Case No. 18-005) in which another officer was granted full TED credit under nearly identical circumstances.

“This isn’t just about one officer’s career,” Thayer emphasized. “It’s about ensuring that our federal service members are treated fairly, that their records reflect their actual contributions, and that agencies follow the law instead of arbitrarily denying benefits based on flawed or biased processes.”

If successful, the case could result in the officer’s record being corrected to reflect the higher TED credit, a retroactive promotion to Captain, and significant backpay and increased retirement benefits. The implications may also extend to other current and former USPHS officers who were misadvised or administratively mishandled.

About the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC

Located in Washington, D.C., the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC is a nationally recognized law firm specializing in military and federal employment law. The firm represents service members, veterans, and federal employees in matters involving military justice, promotions, disability and retirement benefits, and wrongful termination.

 

Disclaimer

This press release is issued by the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, and is intended for informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice or establish an attorney-client relationship.

Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC
100 M Street SE, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20003
(202) 546-9575 |  www.militarydefense.com