Case Explained: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT TAMMY W. RUSSELL v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO O P I N I O N

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Filed: 2026-07-29 The sixth-circuit remanded the appeal to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio to determine in the first instance whether a Deferred Resignation Program Agreement (DRPA) entered into by the appellant extinguished her claims and rendered the case moot. The court applied the Article III mootness doctrine, which requires a live case or controversy, noting that a settlement agreement can deprive a court of jurisdiction if it completely eradicates the effects of the alleged violation. However, because the parties disputed material facts regarding the validity of the release provision in the DRPA—specifically whether Russell entered the agreement knowingly and voluntarily given her alleged anxiety and PTSD—the appellate court could not resolve the jurisdictional issue itself. Consequently, the district court was tasked with making necessary factual findings to decide if the agreement is enforceable and if it mooted Russell’s disability discrimination and retaliation claims under the Rehabilitation Act. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.