Tag: Administrative Procedure Act

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.

Former Navy Member Appeals Federal Ruling in Disability Benefits Case

Posted on by Becky Haugen

Court Asked to Reconsider Standards Used to Deny Full Medical Retirement

A former Navy service member has appealed a federal court ruling that upheld the Department of the Navy’s disability benefits determination, arguing that the decision was contrary to statutory protections and unsupported by the administrative record. The appeal, filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, challenges the standards and methodology used by the Navy’s Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) in assigning a 10% permanent disability rating—far below the threshold required for retirement benefits.

The appeal raises significant questions about how the military adjudicates disability claims involving mental health conditions, particularly Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) linked to combat-related service. The case centers on whether the PDBR misapplied regulatory guidance—specifically the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) § 4.129 and § 4.130—and whether it provided adequate justification for diverging from the Department of Veterans Affairs’ prior 30% disability rating.

According to court records, the appellant had served as a sensor operator involved in combat missions and was later diagnosed with PTSD. Despite this, the Navy separated the service member with a disability rating below the 30% threshold that would have guaranteed medical retirement and long-term benefits. A retroactive review by the PDBR provided temporary retirement benefits for a six-month window but ultimately affirmed the original 10% rating—an outcome the appellant contends is both legally flawed and medically unjust.

The appeal asserts that the PDBR failed to account for relevant medical evidence, improperly minimized symptoms of psychological trauma, and acted in conflict with governing Department of Defense policies that require minimum ratings for combat-related mental health conditions.

Attorneys from the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, who represent the appellant, seek reversal of the lower court’s judgment and a remand for proper reconsideration under the Administrative Procedure Act.

ABOUT THE LAW FIRM

The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, PLLC, based in Washington, D.C., is nationally recognized for its expertise in military and federal litigation. The firm advocates for service members and federal employees in matters involving courts-martial, discharge upgrades, medical retirement, and administrative appeals.

DISCLAIMER

This press release is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The outcome of any legal matter depends on the facts, law, and procedural posture of the case.