Case Explained: 25-1773: REYNOLDS v. DOJ [OPINION], Nonprecedential

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Filed: 2026-06-05 The federal-circuit affirmed the Merit Systems Protection Board’s decision upholding an indefinite suspension without pay imposed on a Department of Justice employee following his indictment for sexual abuse. The court held that the agency satisfied the legal requirements under 5 U.S.C. § 7513 and relevant case law by establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, reasonable cause to believe the employee committed a crime punishable by imprisonment and demonstrating that the suspension promoted the efficiency of the service. The court applied the standard of review set forth in 5 U.S.C. § 7703(c), evaluating whether the Board’s decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, unsupported by substantial evidence, or obtained without required procedures. The court found that the indictment itself provided reasonable cause for the suspension and that the alleged sexual misconduct involving a coworker while on duty created a sufficient nexus to the efficiency of the service as a law enforcement officer. Regarding mitigating factors under *Douglas v. Veterans Administration*, the court noted that while the employee had no prior discipline, the severity of the charges outweighed this factor. Furthermore, the court rejected the argument that the suspension should have been lifted earlier, determining that the agency acted reasonably by maintaining the suspension until the criminal case was resolved via a diversion order and restoring the employee to paid status shortly thereafter. As a result of the affirmation, the indefinite suspension without pay remains in effect as upheld by the Board, and the petitioner’s claim for back pay is denied. The decision is nonprecedential, and no costs are awarded. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.