10 U.S.C. § 1599e
Payment of retention bonuses to DOD civilian employees in Guam.
Notwithstanding subsection (f) of section 5754 of title 5, the Secretary of Defense or Secretary of a military department may waive the limit established under subsection (e)(1) of such section and pay an otherwise eligible employee or category of employees in the territory of Guam retention bonuses of up to 50 percent of basic pay, based on a critical agency need.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41
cases (40 in the last 5 years), 2019–2026 · leading case: Tahuana Bryant v. Dep't of the Army, 2022 MSPB 1 (MSPB 2022).
Tahuana Bryant v. Dep't of the Army, 2022 MSPB 1 (MSPB 2022). “726 , 1023-24 (codified as relevant here at 10 U.S.C. § 1599e (2016) and 5 U.S.C. § 7511 (a)(1)(A)(ii) (2016)).”
Pedro Vazquez v. Dep't of the Air Force, No. DC-315H-19-0466-I-1 (MSPB June 26, 2024). “§ 7511 (a)(1)(A)(ii) by adding an exception codified at 10 U.S.C. § 1599e. Bryant v. Department of the Army, 2022 MSPB 1, ¶ 8 .”
Brian Nelson v. Dep't of the Army, No. DE-315H-21-0119-I-1 (MSPB Apr. 12, 2024). “However, with its motion to dismiss the appeal filed below, the agency attached a copy of the same document and it explained that the document was issued in error because the appellant had only completed 1 year of the 2-year initial probationary period statutorily required by 10…”
Andrew Amavisca v. Dep't of the Air Force, No. SF-315H-20-0500-I-1 (MSPB Oct. 24, 2024). “§ 7511 (a)(1)(A)(ii) (2018) and 10 U.S.C. § 1599e (2018) if he was not serving a probationary or trial period under an initial appointment, or if he had completed 2 years of current continuous service under other than a temporary appointment limited to 1 year or less.”
Christopher Robinson v. Dep't of the Navy, No. PH-315H-20-0373-I-1 (MSPB May 25, 2022). “§ 7511 (a)(1)(A)(ii); 10 U.S.C. § 1599e; Bryant v. Department of the Army, 2022 MSPB 1, ¶¶ 8-10 (finding that the appellant, who was appointed to a competitive service position at the Department of the Army while 10 U.”
Janice Davis v. Dep't of Def., No. DC-315H-22-0654-I-1 (MSPB Apr. 4, 2024). “§ 7511 (a)(1)(A); 10 U.S.C. § 1599e; see also Bryant v. Department of the Army, 2022 MSPB 1, ¶¶ 8-10 (finding that the appellant, who was appointed to a competitive service Department of Defense position while 10 U.”
Malik Shakur v. Dep't of the Air Force, No. DA-315H-21-0053-I-1 (MSPB July 31, 2024). “3 At the time of the appellant’s appointment to his competitive-service position in January 2019, an individual appointed to a permanent competitive-service position at the Department of Defense (DOD) was subject to a 2-year probationary period and only qualified as an…”
Patrick N Dupree v. Dep't of the Army, No. SF-315H-21-0036-I-1 (MSPB Aug. 22, 2024). “§ 7511 (a)(1)(A)(ii) (2016) and 10 U.S.C. § 1599e (2016) if he was not serving a probationary or trial period under an initial appointment, or if he had completed 2 years of current continuous service.”
Christina Young v. Dep't of Def., No. AT-315H-24-0006-I-1 (MSPB Feb. 20, 2025). “§ 7511 (a)(1)(A)(i)-(ii) (2016) and 10 U.S.C. § 1599e (2016)). In December 2021, Congress repealed 10 U.”
Rabee Al Obaidi v. Dep't of the Navy, No. AT-315H-22-0097-I-1 (MSPB Sept. 22, 2022). “In a subsequent order, the administrative judge noted that it appeared the agency was asserting that the appellant’s position was subject to a 3-year probationary period instead of the 2-year probationary period for Department of Defense (DoD) employees set forth under the…”
DaVitta Zekoll v. Dep't of the Army, No. DE-315H-19-0165-I-1 (MSPB May 31, 2024). “10 U.S.C. § 1599e(a), (b)(1)(A), 4 (d), note (repealed 2022); Bryant v.”
Trang Vu v. Dep't of the Air Force, No. DA-315H-23-0433-I-1 (MSPB June 26, 2024). “§ 7511 (a)(1)(A)(ii) (2016) and 10 U.S.C. § 1599e (2016) if she was not serving a probationary or trial period under an initial appointment, or if she had completed 2 years of current continuous service under other than a temporary appointment limited to 1 year or less.”
10 U.S.C. § 1599e(a): 19 cases
Tahuana Bryant v. Dep't of the Army, 2022 MSPB 1 (MSPB 2022). “726 , 1023-24 (codified as relevant here at 10 U.S.C. § 1599e (2016) and 5 U.S.C. § 7511 (a)(1)(A)(ii) (2016)).”
Rabee Al Obaidi v. Dep't of the Navy, No. AT-315H-22-0097-I-1 (MSPB Sept. 22, 2022). “In a subsequent order, the administrative judge noted that it appeared the agency was asserting that the appellant’s position was subject to a 3-year probationary period instead of the 2-year probationary period for Department of Defense (DoD) employees set forth under the…”
Angela Harvey v. Dep't of the Air Force, No. DC-315H-19-0486-I-1 (MSPB Feb. 23, 2024).
Shamar Bradley v. Dep't of the Navy, No. DC-315H-21-0541-I-1 (MSPB July 29, 2022).
Martha Amaya Ortega v. Dep't of the Army, No. DC-315H-22-0151-I-1 (MSPB July 8, 2022).
10 U.S.C. § 1599e(b): 1 case
DaVitta Zekoll v. Dep't of the Army, No. DE-315H-19-0165-I-1 (MSPB May 31, 2024). “10 U.S.C. § 1599e(a), (b)(1)(A), 4 (d), note (repealed 2022); Bryant v.”
10 U.S.C. § 1599e(b)(1): 1 case
Harriel Bolton v. Dep't of the Army, No. AT-315H-19-0724-I-1 (MSPB May 23, 2024).
10 U.S.C. § 1599e(d): 3 cases
Barr v. MSPB, 792 F. App'x 939 (Fed. Cir. 2019).
Branden Smith v. Dep't of Def., No. DE-315H-20-0117-I-1 (MSPB May 24, 2024).
DaVitta Zekoll v. Dep't of the Army, No. DE-315H-19-0165-I-1 (MSPB May 31, 2024). “10 U.S.C. § 1599e(a), (b)(1)(A), 4 (d), note (repealed 2022); Bryant v.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.