CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-01402 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-01402

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

Case Profile
Decision Date12/17/2025
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Marc E. Curry
Government Counsel: Brittany C. M. White
Case Summary
Applicant was a 32-year-old married man with one child, who had served honorably in the U.S. Marines from 2011 to 2015. The Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA) issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline F (financial considerations), Guideline H (drug involvement), and Guideline J (criminal conduct). The core allegations included approximately $27,000 in delinquent debts, a history of marijuana use, and multiple criminal charges related to traffic offenses and a past marijuana possession incident.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to all allegations in the SOR. He acknowledged his financial difficulties, attributing them to immaturity and irresponsibility, and provided evidence of a wage garnishment for child support payments. However, he failed to substantiate claims regarding other debts and did not demonstrate a consistent effort to resolve them. Regarding drug use, he admitted to using marijuana from 2009 until 2023 but claimed to have stopped. He also discussed past criminal charges, including failures to appear in court, which he attributed to similar issues of immaturity.
The administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he failed to mitigate the security concerns related to his financial issues, drug involvement, and criminal conduct. The judge noted that while the applicant had not used marijuana for two years, the duration and frequency of past use raised ongoing concerns. Additionally, the applicant's financial situation remained unresolved, and his criminal history, although not severe, indicated a pattern of irresponsible behavior that could affect his reliability and trustworthiness.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · Against Applicant
- Guideline HDrug Involvement & Substance Misuse · Against Applicant
- Guideline JCriminal Conduct · 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. 24-01402

deniedDec 17, 2025· Hon. Marc E. Curry· hearing

Summary

A 32-year-old married man was denied a security clearance due to concerns under Guideline F (Financial Considerations), Guideline H (Drug Involvement), and Guideline J (Criminal Conduct). The applicant had approximately $27,000 in delinquent debts, which included $7,506 in child support payments and a $9,658 deficiency from a repossessed vehicle. He failed to provide sufficient evidence of repayment or financial responsibility for these debts.

Additionally, the applicant admitted to a history of marijuana use from 2009 to October 2023, including periods while he held a sensitive position. This raised concerns regarding his reliability and trustworthiness.

His criminal conduct included possession with intent to distribute marijuana, carrying a concealed weapon, and multiple failures to appear in court. These actions indicated a pattern of irresponsible behavior. Despite acknowledging these issues, the applicant did not provide adequate evidence of rehabilitation, leading to the denial of his security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant admitted to having approximately $27,000 in delinquent debt, including child support and a car repossession, without sufficient evidence of repayment or financial responsibility.
The applicant's marijuana use spanned from 2009 to 2023, including periods while holding a sensitive position, raising concerns about reliability and trustworthiness.
The applicant's criminal history included multiple failures to appear in court, which indicated a pattern of irresponsible behavior.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)raisedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)raisedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations
AG ¶ 25(a)raisedAny Substance Misuse
AG ¶ 25(f)raisedAny Illegal Drug Use While Granted Access to Classified Information or Holding a Sensitive Position
AG ¶ 31(a)raisedA Pattern of Minor Offenses

Key Rule Quoted

“The protection of the national security is the paramount consideration.”
— AG ¶ 1(d)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedJan 30, 2025
Answer filedFeb 11, 2025
Hearing heldMay 8, 2025via video teleconference
Decision dateDec 17, 2025Decision delayed due to government shutdown

Cite For

Failure to Mitigate Financial Considerations Under Guideline F
Impact of Drug Involvement on Security Clearance Under Guideline H
Pattern of Criminal Conduct Affecting Reliability Under Guideline J

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

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on financial considerations, citing approximately $27,000 in delinquent debts, including child support and a deficiency from a repossessed vehicle. The applicant's claims of immaturity and attempts to address the child support arrears through wage garnishment were not sufficient to mitigate the security concerns raised by his financial delinquencies.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Delinquent debts totaling approximately $27,000, including $7,506 of delinquent child support payments and a $9,658 deficiency on a repossessed car. $27,000	Against Applicant	Child Support Debt	Admitted	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	Claimed Acknowledgment and Remorse

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline F). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline H (Drug Involvement) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant had a long history of marijuana use from 2009 to October 2023, including use while holding a sensitive position. The judge ruled against the applicant on this allegation, concluding that the applicant's past conduct raised significant security concerns that were not sufficiently mitigated.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Substance / event	Use level	Response	Disqualifying (¶25)	Mitigating applied (¶26)	Mitigation
2.a	Longtime marijuana use from 2009 to October 2023, including use while holding a sensitive position.	Against Applicant	MarijuanaWHILE CLEARED	Regular	Unknown	—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline H). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline J (Criminal Conduct) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found against the applicant on all allegations related to criminal conduct, including possession with intent to distribute marijuana and carrying a concealed weapon, as well as multiple failures to appear in court. The applicant's history of criminal conduct and substance misuse raised significant concerns regarding his reliability and trustworthiness for national security eligibility, leading to a denied clearance.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Offense	Criminal disposition	Response	Disqualifying (¶31)	Mitigating applied (¶32)	Mitigation
3.a	Criminal conduct including possession with intent to distribute marijuana and carrying a concealed weapon, along with multiple failures to appear in court.	Against Applicant	Drug Related Criminal Charge	Charged Not Convicted	Denied	(a) pattern of minor offenses casting doubt on judgment/reliability (b) evidence of criminal conduct, regardless of charge or conviction	—	—
3.b–3.f	5 sub-charges — specific text not stated in this decision (against the applicant). (low confidence)	Against Applicant		—		—	—	—

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline J). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

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