Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_19-cv-00608/USCOURTS-ared-4_19-cv-00608-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 899
Nature of Suit: Other Statutes - Administrative Procedure Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision
Cause of Action: 10:1552 Armed Forces: Action to Correct Records

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

CENTRAL DIVISION 

BRUCE H. BOKONY and 

BRANDON H. BOKONY PLAINTIFFS 

 

 

v. 4:19-cv-00608-DPM-JJV 

UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; et al., DEFENDANTS 

PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

INSTRUCTIONS

The following recommended disposition has been sent to Chief United States District 

Judge D.P. Marshall Jr. Any party may serve and file written objections to this recommendation. 

Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for the objection. If 

the objection is to a factual finding, specifically identify that finding and the evidence that supports 

your objection. An original and one copy of your objections must be received in the office of the 

United States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of the findings 

and recommendations. The copy will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file timely 

objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. 

 If you are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit new, different, or 

additional evidence, and to have a hearing for this purpose before the District Judge, you must, at 

the same time that you file your written objections, include the following: 

 1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is inadequate. 

 2. Why the evidence proffered at the hearing (if such a hearing is granted) was not 

offered at the hearing before the Magistrate Judge. 

 3. The details of any testimony desired to be introduced at the new hearing in the form 

of an offer of proof, and a copy, or the original, of any documentary or other non-testimonial 

Case 4:19-cv-00608-DPM Document 46 Filed 03/11/20 Page 1 of 4
2

evidence desired to be introduced at the new hearing. 

 From this submission, the District Judge will determine the necessity for an additional 

evidentiary hearing. Mail your objections and “Statement of Necessity” to: 

Clerk, United States District Court 

Eastern District of Arkansas 

600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149 

Little Rock, AR 72201-3325 

DISPOSITION 

I. BACKGROUND

 This case involves the termination of dependent benefits by the Department of Defense. 

Bruce H. Bokony is a U.S. Navy retiree and caretaker of his thirty-seven-year-old disabled son. 

Brandon Bokony, disabled since his premature birth, receives disability benefits from the Social 

Security Administration and had previously been receiving dependent medical, dental and other 

benefits through his father’s military retirement. In August 2017, the Department of Defense 

initiated a “quadrennial financial dependency determination recertification” and compared the 

percent of support provided by Bruce Bokony to the support received by the Social Security 

Administration. Based on this comparison, the government reported, “In accordance with U.S.C. 

Title 10, the sponsor must be providing over 50% of the financial support for a child to continue 

receiving benefits after the age of 21. After reviewing the documents you submitted, one half of 

Brandon’s monthly expenses are $1,060.39 and his income is $1,137.00 which is over 50% of his 

expenses.” (Doc. No. 1 at 12.) Accordingly, the Department of Defense terminated Brandon 

Bokony’s benefits as of January 10, 2018. Through his Complaint, Bruce Bokony seeks, inter 

alia, declaratory and injunctive relief to restore his son’s benefits. 

 In response, the government moves for remand of this case for reconsideration by the Navy 

Personnel Command (NPC). Defendants states, “During the remand period, NPC will have the 

Case 4:19-cv-00608-DPM Document 46 Filed 03/11/20 Page 2 of 4
3

opportunity to review and consider materials submitted by plaintiff’s in support of the alleged 

errors or injustices identified in their complaint arising from the denial of the financial 

recertification for Brandon Bokony’s benefits.” (Doc. No. 41 at 2.) Defendants add, “Should 

plaintiff’s be dissatisfied with the NPC decision resulting from this remand, this matter may be 

reviewed under the standards set forth pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 

701-706.” (Id.) Defendants also set forth specific timelines for remand rather than an indefinite 

period for agency review. (Doc. No. 42 at 5.) 

 Plaintiffs oppose this request. (Doc. No. 43.) But Plaintiffs provide no strong basis for 

the Court to deny this request. (Doc. No. 43 at 3, 44.) 

 I recognize Plaintiffs are exhausted trying to restore the precious benefits they believe were 

unjustly and unlawfully stripped away. However, given the Defendants’ proposed timelines, I 

find the request to remand should be granted. It appears the most just and proper method for fully 

evaluating Plaintiffs’ claims is to allow the NPC the opportunity to obtain all the necessary 

documentation and engage in a meaningful analysis of whether or not federal law allows Brandon 

Bokony to resume receipt of his dependent benefits. 

II. CONCLUSION

IT IS, THEREFORE, RECOMMENDED that:

1. Pursuant to Rule 7 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this matter be remanded 

to the Secretary of the Navy for submission to and reconsideration by the NPC. The initial period 

of remand should be for 120 days; 

2. Plaintiffs be allowed thirty (30) days from the date this order is adopted to file 

additional matters or amend their financial recertification information for reconsideration by the 

NPC; 

Case 4:19-cv-00608-DPM Document 46 Filed 03/11/20 Page 3 of 4
4

3. Remand will be for the purpose of NPC reviewing any additional evidence 

submitted by Plaintiffs and reconsidering whether Brandon Bokony qualifies for dependent 

benefits and all other claims made in Plaintiffs’ January 31, 2020 Brief (Doc. No. 40); 

4. This matter will be stayed until completion of the remand; and 

5. Counsel for Defendants shall notify the Court within 30 days of a decision by the 

NPC on remand. 

DATED this 11th day of March 2020. 

 ____________________________________ 

 JOE J. VOLPE 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 4:19-cv-00608-DPM Document 46 Filed 03/11/20 Page 4 of 4