CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 08-10204.a1 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 08-10204.a1

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

Case Profile
Decision Date10/6/2009
Statusunknown
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Related decisionsSee the appeal decision (Case 08-10204.a2) →See the hearing decision (Case 08-10204.h2) →See the hearing decision (Case 08-10204) →See the hearing decision (Case 08-10204.h1) →
Participants
Judge: Michael Y. Ra'anan, Michael D. Hipple, James E. Moody
Government Counsel: James B. Norman
Case Summary
The applicant in this case sought a security clearance but was initially denied by the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) due to concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations). The Statement of Reasons issued on December 30, 2008, outlined the security concerns that led to this decision. Following a hearing, Administrative Judge Juan J. Rivera denied the applicant's request for a security clearance on July 23, 2009.
During the appeal process, the applicant raised a credible allegation that evidence he submitted had not been received by the Judge. The applicant's appeal brief, filed on September 2, 2009, included this new evidence, prompting Department Counsel to agree that remanding the case would be an appropriate resolution to ensure that all pertinent evidence was considered.
The Appeal Board, recognizing the potential oversight, remanded the case for further processing to allow the Administrative Judge to review the evidence that may not have been previously considered. The decision emphasized that this remand would not affect the appeal rights of either party involved.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · Unknown Outcome
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. 08-10204.a1

unknownOct 6, 2009· Hon. Michael Y. Ra'anan· hearing

Summary

This case involves an applicant, represented by counsel, who appealed the denial of a security clearance. The denial was based on Guideline F, which addresses financial considerations.

The core of the appeal centered on credible allegations that evidence submitted by the applicant did not reach the original judge during the initial review process. This procedural issue led to a remand of the case.

The purpose of the remand is to ensure that all pertinent evidence is properly considered before a final decision is made regarding the applicant's security clearance. As of the current status, no final outcome has been reached.

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedDec 30, 2008
Answer filed—
Hearing heldJul 23, 2009Administrative Judge denied request for security clearance.
Decision dateOct 6, 2009Case remanded for further processing.

Cite For

Remand for Further Processing Due to Unconsidered Evidence
Credibility of Applicant's Allegations Regarding Evidence Submission
Administrative Economy in Handling Appeals

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.