Introduction
A recent Federal Circuit decision provides an important reminder for Service members going through the military Disability Evaluation System (“DES”): being able to perform some work is not necessarily the same thing as being fit for continued military service. In Qoye v. United States, the court rejected a disability decision because the Navy failed to adequately identify what the Service member’s actual military duties required and then determine whether his medical condition allowed him to perform those duties. Qoye v. United States, No. 2024-1690, slip op. at 10–13 (Fed. Cir. July 30, 2026).
That distinction can be extremely important for Sailors, Marines, Soldiers, Airmen, Guardians, and other Service members facing a Medical Evaluation Board (“MEB”) or Physical Evaluation Board (“PEB”). The question in a disability case is not simply whether a Service member can come to work, perform administrative tasks, or receive acceptable performance evaluations. The real question is whether the member can reasonably perform the duties expected of someone in that member’s office, grade, rank, or rating.
A Navy Nuclear Machinist Mate With an Undiagnosed Sleep Disorder
Yishai Qoye served in the Navy and was assigned aboard the USS Eisenhower as a nuclear machinist mate. During that assignment, Qoye experienced serious difficulty staying awake. Fellow Sailors later described him as repeatedly falling asleep, including while standing watch and performing maintenance. His formal performance evaluations, however, did not document fatigue interfering with his performance.
Qoye sought Navy medical treatment for his sleep problems beginning in 2009. The Navy eventually performed a sleep study in 2010, but that examination focused on possible sleep apnea and did not test him for narcolepsy. The Navy never performed separate narcolepsy testing while he remained on active duty.
After leaving the Navy, Qoye underwent additional testing through the Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”). This time, the testing included a Multiple Sleep Latency Test, which produced findings consistent with narcolepsy. The VA ultimately assigned Qoye a 40-percent service-connected disability rating for narcolepsy effective from his separation. A VA physician also expressed the opinion that Qoye had developed narcolepsy, or experienced a major worsening of the condition, while on active duty.
The problem was that Qoye had already left the Navy without going through an MEB and PEB.
The Navy Later Admitted Qoye Should Have Received Disability Evaluation
Years later, Qoye petitioned the Board for Correction of Naval Records (“BCNR”). He asked the Navy to correct his records to show that he should have been medically retired for narcolepsy. Significantly, the BCNR agreed that the Navy had failed to properly diagnose Qoye’s narcolepsy and had failed to refer him through the MEB and PEB process before his separation. The BCNR therefore sent his records to an informal PEB (“IPEB”) for a retrospective decision about whether he had actually been fit at the time he left service.
The IPEB found Qoye fit.
That decision had its own unusual history. The IPEB initially reached its conclusion after mistakenly reviewing another Service member’s medical records. After discovering the mistake, the PEB reviewed Qoye’s correct records but again found him fit. The BCNR eventually upheld that determination. It concluded that the evidence did not show Qoye had been unable to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating because of narcolepsy. The Court of Federal Claims later agreed, relying in part on Qoye’s performance evaluations, his 2010 sleep study, and the fact that he applied for a mechanic position several years after leaving the Navy.
The Federal Circuit saw a major problem with that analysis.
The Board Never Really Asked What Qoye’s Job Required
The Federal Circuit held that the BCNR had failed to perform the required fitness analysis because it never adequately identified the military tasks Qoye was actually expected to perform as a nuclear machinist mate. That matters because disability fitness is inherently job-specific. Under the Navy regulation governing Qoye’s case, the decision-maker was required to consider whether a member could reasonably perform military duties, including common military tasks, deployability, and special qualifications.
Instead of conducting that analysis, the Board relied on broad statements from Qoye’s evaluations, such as his ability to assist with complex maintenance and complete tasks with little supervision. But those general observations did not answer the real question: What tasks was a nuclear machinist mate actually required to perform, and could Qoye safely and reasonably perform them with narcolepsy?
The court emphasized an especially important point for Service members challenging a fitness determination. Identifying the duties that matter to the fitness analysis is not a burden that can simply be placed on the member. The Board itself must provide a sufficiently clear statement of the duties the Service member could reasonably be expected to perform.
Special Qualifications and Deployability Also Matter
Qoye’s case was particularly significant because he worked in the Navy’s nuclear field. Nuclear duty requires heightened levels of reliability, alertness, and judgment. The Navy’s medical standards applicable at the time specifically identified sleep disorders causing daytime fatigue, somnolence, or inattention as disqualifying for nuclear field duty. Yet the Board never meaningfully considered whether Qoye’s narcolepsy affected those special qualifications.
The Board also failed to address deployability. The government acknowledged during oral argument that the BCNR decision contained no specific discussion of it. The Federal Circuit held that the failures to consider Qoye’s common military tasks, deployability, and special qualifications each supported vacating the decision.
This part of the case has obvious implications beyond nuclear personnel. Many Service members hold jobs that require qualifications that go far beyond simply reporting to a workplace. Aviation personnel must remain medically qualified to fly. Divers must be capable of diving. Special operations personnel must perform demanding operational tasks. Weapons personnel, maintainers, medical personnel, and others may have specialized responsibilities that cannot fairly be replaced with the question: “Can this person still do something useful?”
A Civilian Job Does Not Automatically Prove Military Fitness
The Federal Circuit also rejected another common type of reasoning. The Board had pointed to Qoye’s post-service application for work as a Marine Machinery Mechanic as evidence that he apparently believed himself capable of working. But the Board never identified what that civilian job required or explained how those duties compared with being a Navy nuclear machinist mate. Without that comparison, the court concluded that the evidence did not meaningfully establish Qoye’s military fitness.
That principle matters for Service members who are working civilian jobs, attending school, volunteering, or performing limited administrative military duties while undergoing DES. The fact that someone can perform one type of work does not necessarily establish that the person can perform the substantially different duties required by military service.
What Qoye Means for Service Members Going Through IDES
For Service members currently undergoing the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (“IDES”), Qoye reinforces an important way of thinking about fitness. The central question should be: What does your military job actually require, and how does your medical condition affect your ability to perform those requirements?
That means the evidence in an IDES case should not stop with diagnoses and disability percentages. It should address actual functional limitations. Can the member carry required equipment? Stand watch? Work prolonged shifts? Deploy? Perform field duties? Maintain required certifications? Safely operate weapons, aircraft, vehicles, machinery, or other mission-essential equipment? Perform the physical and mental tasks expected of someone holding that rank and specialty?
Those questions are often more important to the military fitness determination than the simple fact that a member continues to report for duty.
The Federal Circuit Did Not Order Qoye Medically Retired
There is an important limitation to the decision. The Federal Circuit did not hold that Qoye was unfit or order the Navy to medically retire him. Instead, the court vacated the prior decision and sent the case back because the Navy had not performed the fitness analysis required by its governing standards. The BCNR must now reconsider his case while properly addressing his actual military duties, deployability, and special nuclear qualifications.That distinction is important. The case does not mean that every member with duty limitations must be found unfit. It means the military cannot support a fitness determination with general statements that the member worked adequately or appeared capable of employment while ignoring the specific duties the member was actually expected to perform.
Conclusion – Key Takeaway(s)
For Service members facing an MEB or PEB, that may be the most important lesson from the case: fitness is not about whether you can still do some work. It is about whether your medical conditions allow you to reasonably perform the military duties that your office, grade, rank, or rating actually requires.
If you are struggling with these issues, please do not hesitate to contact Joel Pettit Law to discuss your potential case.
