LaDonna Schrock v. Department of Veterans Affairs, DE-0714-20-0053-I-1

LaDonna Schrock, an employee of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), was removed from her position for alleged violations of the Professional Boundaries and Ethical Conduct Policy.
The initial agency removal was upheld by an administrative judge under 38 U.S.C. § 714, applying a substantial evidence review standard.
Schrock appealed, arguing procedural and substantive errors, including the standard of proof used by the agency and the appropriateness of the penalty imposed.
After the administrative judge's decision, Federal Circuit precedents (Rodriguez and Connor) clarified that agencies must apply the preponderance of the evidence standard, not substantial evidence, in disciplinary actions, and must apply Douglas factors when selecting penalties.
The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) granted Schrock's petition for review, vacated the initial decision, and remanded the case for further adjudication, allowing the parties to present additional evidence and arguments regarding both the standard of review and penalty selection.

Issue	Schrock's Argument	VA's Argument	Held
Whether agency used correct burden of proof	Agency erred by using lower substantial evidence standard	Agency's process was consistent with its understanding at the time	Remanded: Need to determine if error was harmful
Whether penalty was properly reviewed	Administrative judge should have reviewed penalty's reasonableness	Judge cannot mitigate penalty under section 714	Remanded: Board must apply Douglas factors
Whistleblower reprisal as affirmative defense	Removal was retaliation for whistleblowing	Removal based on misconduct, not retaliation	Remanded: Judge should reconsider after other issues

Rodriguez v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 8 F.4th 1290 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (Board, not agency, applies substantial evidence standard; agency must use preponderance of the evidence)
Connor v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 8 F.4th 1319 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (Both agency and Board must apply Douglas factors in penalty selection/review)
Carr v. Social Security Administration, 185 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (Whistleblower retaliation framework and factors)