Opinion

BOTELLO v. United States

Court
United States Court of Federal Claims
Filed
Apr 2, 2025
Status
Unpublished
On the bench
Thompson M. Dietz
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

No. 23-174

(Filed: April 2, 2025)

*************************************

JEREMIAH BOTELLO, et al., *

*

Plaintiffs, *

*

v. *

*

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, *

*

Defendant. *

*************************************

ORDER

On February 19, 2025, the Court stayed this case “while the Department of Defense

[(“DoD”)] determine[d] how to implement the Executive Order pertaining to the reinstatement of

service members discharged under the military’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate.” [ECF 47] at

1. The Court also ordered the parties to file a joint status report on April 1, 2025, “informing the

Court of (i) the status of the implementation of the Executive Order and (ii) whether its

implementation has affected any of the pending claims of the individual plaintiffs.” Id. On April

1, 2025, the parties filed a joint status report. [ECF 48]. The Court has considered the parties’

respective positions and orders the following:

 In the joint status report, the government states that, “[i]n light of DoD’s policy,

the United States intends to request a voluntary remand of the plaintiffs’ claims to

their respective [board for correction of military/naval records] so that the

plaintiffs may (1) submit an application for the correction of records, and (2)

request reinstatement, if applicable.” [ECF 48] at 3. The government intends to

file its motion on or before April 8, 2025. Id. The plaintiffs state that they “will

set forth their objections to any such motion for voluntary remand if and when

such motion is filed.” Id. at 4. Accordingly, the government SHALL FILE its

motion for voluntary remand on or before April 8, 2025. The plaintiffs shall

respond as required by Rule 7.2(a)(1) of the Rules of the United States Court of

Federal Claims. The Court will contact the parties to schedule a hearing on the

government’s motion for a voluntary remand.

 Prior to the stay in this case, the plaintiffs filed their Motion for Judgment on the

Administrative Record (“MJAR”) on December 6, 2024. See [ECF 41]. The

government’s response and cross-MJAR was due by February 21, 2025, the

plaintiffs’ response and reply was due by March 28, 2025, and the government’s

reply was due by April 18, 2025. See [ECF 43]. This briefing schedule has been

superseded by events in this case. Therefore, the Court will issue a modified

briefing schedule after addressing the government’s motion for a voluntary

remand.

 On January 29, 2025, the government moved for a 60-day stay, which the Court

granted. See [ECFs 44, 47]. In light of the parties’ upcoming briefing on the

government’s motion for voluntary remand, the Court hereby lifts the stay.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Thompson M. Dietz

THOMPSON M. DIETZ, Judge

2

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.