A decided public DOHA case, shown for research, not advice or a prediction.
ISCR Case No. 07-16841.a2
DeniedDecided Feb 24, 2009 · Administrative Judge Jean E. Smallin · Hearing
Case headnote
Summary
The applicant, represented by counsel, sought reconsideration of a previous adverse decision regarding security clearance. The Appeal Board found no persuasive reason to alter its prior ruling, affirming the denial based on the applicant's failure to demonstrate that the Board would reach a different conclusion upon reconsideration.
Why the applicant was denied
- The applicant failed to articulate a persuasive reason for reconsideration.
- The Board found no error in its previous interpretation of the state anti-deficiency statute.
- The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to support a different outcome regarding mitigation.
Key rule quoted
“There is no right to reconsideration; the Board has the sole discretion to decide whether to exercise its inherent authority to reconsider one of its decisions.”
Procedural posture
- Decision Date
- 2009-02-24
- Request for Reconsideration Filed
- 2009-02-05
- Original Decision Date
- 2008-12-19
Cite for
- Discretion of the Appeal Board Regarding Reconsideration Requests
- Lack of a Right to Reconsideration in Security Clearance Cases
- Requirements for Demonstrating Persuasive Reasons for Reconsideration
Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.
From the decision
Facts this decision states, each with the sentence it comes from. Descriptive of the record, not an assessment.
Full decision
Open original PDFThe complete official text, footnotes and signatures included, is in the original PDF.
Decision text, by section
Synopsis
KEYWORD: Guideline F; Guideline E; Guideline J DIGEST: There is no right to reconsideration. Applicant has failed to articulate a persuasive reason to conclude that, were the Board to reconsider its decision, it would a different results. Applicant’s request denied. Adverse decision affirmed CASENO: 07-16841.a2 DATE: 02/24/2009 DATE: February 24, 2009 In Re: ------------- Applicant for Security Clearance ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ISCR Case No. 07-16841
Appeal Board Decision
ON APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Appearances
FOR GOVERNMENT James B. Norman, Esq., Chief Department Counsel FOR APPLICANT Sheldon Cohen, Esq. The Board issued an Appeal Board Decision in this case on December 19, 2008. On February 5, 2009, Applicant submitted a request for reconsideration of this decision. The Board has inherent authority to entertain requests to reconsider its decisions. However, there is no right to reconsideration; the Board has the sole discretion to decide whether to exercise its inherent authority to reconsider one of its decisions. See ISCR Case No. 98-0621 at 1-2 (App. Bd. Nov. 23, 1999). In support of his request, Applicant contends that the Board erred in its interpretation of the state anti-deficiency statute and that it erred in holding that the record did not support the Judge’s favorable conclusion as to mitigation. The Board has considered Applicant’s motion and accompanying “Reply Brief. ” Applicant has failed to articulate a persuasive reason to conclude that, were the Board to reconsider its decision, it would reach a different result. See, e.g., ISCR Case No.03-21012 (App. Bd. Sep. 20 2005). Accordingly, Applicant’s request is DENIED. Signed: Jean E. Smallin Jean E. Smallin Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: William S. Fields William S. Fields Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board Signed: James E. Moody James E. Moody Administrative Judge Member, Appeal Board