Filed Date: Nov. 19, 2025
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
This is a case challenging the termination of an FBI employee for displaying a Pride flag at the Los Angeles Field Office. Plaintiff, a gay man who had worked for the FBI for 16 years as a non-Agent employee, was terminated in October 2025 for displaying a Pride flag in his workstation.
In 2022, the Plaintiff was given two Pride flags by leadership at the Los Angeles Field Office. Plaintiff displayed one of these Pride flags at his workstation. After January 20, 2025, Plaintiff had received confirmation from the Chief Division Counsel for the Los Angeles Field Office that the display of the Pride flag was permissible. In 2025, Plaintiff applied to and completed most of the FBI Academy’s training program to become an FBI Special Agent. On October 1, 2025, three weeks before the training program was complete, Plaintiff was terminated by a letter signed by FBI Director Kashyap Patel. The letter claimed that Plaintiff “exercised poor judgment with an inappropriate display of political signage in [Plaintiff’s] work area during [Plaintiff’s] previous assignment at the Los Angeles Field Office.”
On November 19, 2025, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiff named FBI Director Kashyap Patel, Attorney General Pamela Bondi, the FBI, and the Department of Justice as defendants (“Defendants”). The case was assigned to District Judge Richard J. Leon. Plaintiff alleged that his termination violated his First Amendment rights to free association and speech, as well as his Fifth Amendment rights, which prohibits the federal government from denying equal protection or engaging in unjust discrimination. Plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief; alternatively, he asked for a writ of mandamus, commanding Defendants to return him to his most recent position in the FBI.
On February 19, 2026, Pamela Bondi filed a partial motion to dismiss. As of March 31, the court has not yet ruled on this motion.
This case is ongoing.
Summary Authors
Allison Opheim (3/31/2026)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71932232/parties/maltinsky-v-patel/
Leon, Richard J. (District of Columbia)
Donovan, Margaret (District of Columbia)
Mattei, Christopher (District of Columbia)
Riggs, Kerrie Diane (District of Columbia)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71932232/maltinsky-v-patel/
Last updated April 1, 2026, 3:30 a.m.
State / Territory:
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
Trump Administration 2.0: Litigation and Investigations Involving the Government
Key Dates
Filing Date: Nov. 19, 2025
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Private Plaintiff
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Federal
Kahyap Patel, Pamela Bondi
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Constitutional Clause(s):
Other Dockets:
District of District of Columbia 1:25-cv-04031
Available Documents:
Outcome
Prevailing Party: None Yet / None
Relief Sought:
Relief Granted:
Source of Relief:
Issues
Discrimination Area:
Content/viewpoint discrimination
LGBTQ+:
Case Summary of Maltinsky v. Patel, Civil Rights Litig. Clearinghouse, https://clearinghouse.net/case/47405/ (last updated 3/31/2026).