CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 11-06577.a1 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 11-06577.a1

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date11/9/2012
Statusunknown
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Judge: Jeffrey D. Billett, Michael Y. Ra'anan, William S. Fields
Government Counsel: James B. Norman
Case Summary
The applicant in this case sought a security clearance but was denied by the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) due to security concerns under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference) as outlined in the Statement of Reasons issued on April 23, 2012. The applicant requested a hearing to contest the decision.
During the proceedings, the applicant's counsel requested that the record remain open for the submission of additional written materials, which was granted by the administrative judge. The applicant submitted six documents for consideration; however, the judge had already issued a final decision denying the security clearance on September 28, 2012, prior to the submission of these documents. The applicant subsequently appealed the decision, requesting an expedited remand.
The Appeal Board remanded the case for further processing, noting that the judge's decision was issued before the applicant's supplemental materials were considered. The remand was intended to ensure that the applicant's rights were preserved and that the case could be reviewed in light of the newly submitted evidence.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline BForeign Influence · Against Applicant
- Guideline CForeign Preference · Against Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 11-06577.a1

unknownNov 9, 2012· Hon. Jeffrey D. Billett· hearing

Summary

This case involves an applicant, represented by counsel, who sought a security clearance but faced initial denial under Guideline B (Foreign Influence) and Guideline C (Foreign Preference). The applicant appealed this decision.

The appeal resulted in the case being remanded for further processing. This was due to the record being held open for supplemental materials that were submitted after a final decision had already been issued.

Ultimately, the verified outcome of this specific DOHA security-clearance decision is that no final determination has been reached yet. The case remains in process following the remand.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG BraisedForeign Influence
AG CraisedForeign Preference

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedApr 23, 2012
Answer filed—
Hearing heldSep 28, 2012
Decision dateNov 9, 2012Final decision issued prior to submission of supplemental materials.

Cite For

Remand for Further Processing After Appeal
Security Concerns Under Guideline B and C
Record Held Open for Supplemental Materials

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.