CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 24-02453 — CASE

DOHA Record Explorer

ISCR Case 24-02453

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

Case Profile
Decision Date1/7/2026
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Mark W. Harvey
Government Counsel: Sakeena Farhath
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 55-year-old systems administrator who had been employed by a Department of Defense contractor since December 2022. The allegations against him arose under Guideline D (sexual behavior) of the adjudicative guidelines, specifically concerning his termination from a previous job for sexual harassment. The Statement of Reasons (SOR) indicated that he made inappropriate sexual comments to a coworker and viewed inappropriate media at work.
During the proceedings, the applicant denied the allegations, asserting that he did not recall making the specific comments attributed to him and maintained that he complied with workplace rules. He admitted to liking "naughty librarians" but denied any inappropriate behavior towards his coworker, Ms. Y. The administrative judge found that the applicant's denials were not credible and that the government had established substantial evidence of disqualifying conduct. Consequently, the judge ruled that the security concerns under Guideline D were not mitigated, leading to a denial of the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information. The judge emphasized the importance of maintaining trust and confidence in individuals with access to sensitive information, concluding that the applicant's behavior posed a potential risk to national security.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline DSexual Behavior · 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. 24-02453

deniedJan 7, 2026· Hon. Mark W. Harvey· hearing

Summary

A 55-year-old systems administrator was denied a security clearance under Guideline D (Sexual Behavior) due to unresolved concerns stemming from his termination for sexual harassment. In October 2022, the applicant was fired from his employment for allegedly making inappropriate sexual comments to and about co-workers. He was also accused of using his personal laptop to view inappropriate images, videos, and/or media while at work.

The judge found the applicant's denials of these allegations to be untruthful and lacking credibility. Specifically, the judge determined that the applicant failed to take responsibility for creating a sexually hostile work environment.

Consequently, the disqualifying conditions under AG ¶ 13(c) and AG ¶ 13(d) were raised, leading to the denial of the applicant's security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant was terminated for sexual harassment, including making inappropriate comments and viewing inappropriate media at work.
The judge found the applicant's denials of the allegations to be untruthful and lacking credibility.
The applicant failed to take responsibility for creating a sexually hostile work environment.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 13(c)appliedSexual Behavior That Causes an Individual to Be Vulnerable to Coercion, Exploitation, or Duress.
AG ¶ 13(d)appliedSexual Behavior of a Public Nature or That Reflects Lack of Discretion or Judgment.

Key Rule Quoted

“Once a concern arises regarding an applicant’s security clearance eligibility, there is a strong presumption against granting a security clearance.”
— Dorfmont v. Brown, 913 F. 2d 1399, 1401 (9th Cir. 1990)

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedMay 27, 2025
Answer filedJun 30, 2025
Hearing heldDec 5, 2025via Microsoft Teams
Decision dateJan 7, 2026

Cite For

Denial of Security Clearance Due to Sexual Harassment Allegations
Credibility Issues in Applicant's Denials of Inappropriate Conduct
Application of AG ¶ 13(c) and AG ¶ 13(d) in Sexual Behavior Cases

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 D (Sexual Behavior) · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the Applicant was terminated from his employment for sexual harassment, which included making inappropriate sexual comments and viewing inappropriate media at work. The judge ruled against the Applicant, concluding that his behavior created a sexually hostile work environment and was inconsistent with national security interests.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶13)	Mitigating applied (¶14)	Mitigation
1.a	In October 2022, Applicant was terminated from his employment for sexual harassment. He allegedly made inappropriate sexual comments to and about his co-workers. He also used his personal laptop to view inappropriate images, videos, and/or media at his place of employment.	Against Applicant	Workplace Sexual Misconduct	Denied	(c) sexual behavior that causes an individual to be vulnerable to coercion, exploitation, or duress (d) sexual behavior of a public nature or that reflects lack of discretion or judgment	—	—

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

Full decision

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