MICHAEL POFFENBARGER, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. FRANK KENDALL, III, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Air Force; JOHN D. DEGOES, in his official capacity as Acting Surgeon General of the Air Force; JOHN P. HEALY, in his official capacity as Commander, Air Force Reserve Command; MAJOR GENERAL D. SCOTT DURHAM, in his official capacity as Commander, 4th Air Force; LIEUTENANT COLONEL MICHAEL R. RUBELING, in his official capacity as Commander, 445th Operations Support Squadron; COLONEL DOUGLAS A. PERRY, in his official capacity as Commander, 445th Airlift Wing; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - Articles

All Content

MICHAEL POFFENBARGER, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. FRANK KENDALL, III, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Air Force; JOHN D. DEGOES, in his official capacity as Acting Surgeon General of the Air Force; JOHN P. HEALY, in his official capacity as Commander, Air Force Reserve Command; MAJOR GENERAL D. SCOTT DURHAM, in his official capacity as Commander, 4th Air Force; LIEUTENANT COLONEL MICHAEL R. RUBELING, in his official capacity as Commander, 445th Operations Support Squadron; COLONEL DOUGLAS A. PERRY, in his official capacity as Commander, 445th Airlift Wing; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Posted by: Azya Thornton on May 12, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ON BRIEF: Christopher Wiest, CHRIS WIEST, ATTY AT LAW, PLLC Covington, Kentucky, Thomas B. Bruns, BRUNS CONNELL VOLLMAR & ARMSTRONG, Cincinnati, Ohio, Aaron Siri, Elizabeth A. Brehm, Wendy Cox, SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP, New York, New York, Zachary Gottesman, GOTTESMAN LAW, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ON BRIEF: Sarah Carroll, Casen B. Ross, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

Judge(s): KETHLEDGE, BUSH, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Dayton

KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge. Michael Poffenbarger, a First Lieutenant in the Air Force Reserve, brought this suit alleging that the Air Force’s COVID-19 mandate, as applied to him, violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and the First Amendment. The Air Force later rescinded that mandate, and the district court dismissed the case as moot. We affirm the dismissal, though on different grounds.

Attachments: