Case: Mauldin v. Blanche

1:26-cv-01814 | U.S. District Court for the District of District of Columbia

Filed Date: May 26, 2026

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This case challenges the denial of disability accommodations for federal employees and the alleged retaliation they faced as a result. On May 26, 2026, two Supervisory IT Program Managers in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Criminal Division’s Office of Administration (ADM) filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the U.S. Attorney General in his official capacity. The plaintiffs claimed that their February 2025 requests for telework were denied after the T…

This case challenges the denial of disability accommodations for federal employees and the alleged retaliation they faced as a result.

On May 26, 2026, two Supervisory IT Program Managers in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Criminal Division’s Office of Administration (ADM) filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the U.S. Attorney General in his official capacity. The plaintiffs claimed that their February 2025 requests for telework were denied after the Trump administration’s January 2025 return-to-office mandate, despite prior successful telework arrangements. They also alleged that after requesting disability accommodations, they faced retaliation, including demotions, removal of supervisory duties, and hostile treatment. The plaintiffs asserted Rehabilitation Act violations and sought damages, injunctive relief requiring reversal of the denied accommodations, and attorney’s fees. This case was assigned to District Judge John D. Bates.

As of August 20, 2026, this case is ongoing.

 

Summary Authors

Alexis Gil (8/20/2026)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73391533/parties/mauldin-v-blanche/


Judge(s)

Bates, John D. (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Whelan, Peter Matthew (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case
1

1:26-cv-01814

Complaint

May 26, 2026

May 26, 2026

Complaint

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/73391533/mauldin-v-blanche/

Last updated Aug. 20, 2026, 3:17 a.m.

Docket for: MAULDIN v. BLANCHE
ECF Number Date Description Link
1 May 26, 2026

COMPLAINT against TODD BLANCHE with Jury Demand ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number ADCDC-12443532) filed by JOSHUA MAULDIN, TARIK SMAJIC. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons AAG Blanche, # 3 Summons Ass't AG for Administration, # 4 Summons USAO DC)(Whelan, Peter) (Entered: 05/26/2026)

1 Civil Cover Sheet

View on PACER

2 Summons AAG Blanche

View on PACER

3 Summons Ass't AG for Administration

View on PACER

4 Summons USAO DC

View on PACER

Clearinghouse
2 May 27, 2026

Sealed Document

RECAP
3 May 27, 2026

Request for Summons to Issue

RECAP
4 May 27, 2026

Errata

RECAP
May 27, 2026

Notice of Error- New Case

5 May 28, 2026

Electronic Summons Issued as to AUSA,USAG

RECAP
May 28, 2026

Case Assigned/Reassigned

6 June 2, 2026

AFFIDAVIT of Mailing by JOSHUA MAULDIN, TARIK SMAJIC re 5 Summons Issued Electronically as to AUSA U.S. Attorney General (Acting), Ass't AG for Admin. (Whelan, Peter) Modified on 6/16/2026 to correct event/ docket text (zjm). (Entered: 06/02/2026)

RECAP
7 Aug. 6, 2026

Extension of Time to

RECAP
Aug. 6, 2026

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to AND Set/Reset Deadlines

Case Details

State / Territory:

District of Columbia

Case Type(s):

Disability Rights

Special Collection(s):

Trump Administration 2.0: Challenges to the Government

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 26, 2026

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

The plaintiffs are two Supervisory IT Program Managers in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Criminal Division’s Office of Administration (ADM).

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Federal

U.S. Attorney General

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Ex Parte Young (Federal) or Bivens

Other Dockets:

District of District of Columbia 1:26-cv-01814

Available Documents:

Complaint (any)

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Relief Sought:

Attorneys fees

Damages

Injunction

Relief Granted:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

General/Misc.:

Retaliation

Disability and Disability Rights:

Reasonable Accommodations

Recommended Citation