Case Explained: 24-1891: MCGOWAN v. OPM [OPINION], Nonprecedential

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Filed: 2026-06-15 The Federal Circuit affirmed the Merit Systems Protection Board’s decision denying Val McGowan’s application for disability retirement benefits under the Federal Employees’ Retirement System (FERS). The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to review the factual underpinnings of OPM’s determination that McGowan was not disabled, as such findings are reserved for the Board. Regarding legal errors, the court found no error in the Board’s assessment of credibility; the Board did not categorically exclude “subjective” medical evidence based on its type, but rather assigned it no weight because McGowan’s testimony regarding the origin of his PTSD was found to be false and contradicted by official Navy records. Consequently, the medical evidence derived from McGowan’s statements was also deemed not credible. Additionally, the court ruled that McGowan forfeited his argument that the Board abused its discretion by allowing OPM to submit new evidence in a post-hearing brief because he failed to make a specific objection during the proceedings. The practical consequence is that the MSPB’s denial of disability retirement benefits remains final and enforceable. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.