A federal judge has dismissed on procedural grounds a lawsuit from one University of Colorado scientist that alleged whistleblower retaliation and harassment within a prominent environmental science program, as well as more serious accusations of potential espionage and bribery.

Justin J.E. Mabie works as a research scientist at the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, a longstanding partnership between CU-Boulder and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. His legal claims against CIRES’ director, former NASA chief scientist Waleed Abdalati, attempted to illustrate Abdalati’s alleged threats and pressure on subordinates to engage in illegal behavior – including the possible endangerment of national security.

However, the more-than-100 pages of emails and letters Mabie included with his lawsuit also portrayed a different version of events, with Abdalati repeatedly trying to mediate a turf war between research scientists, while remaining open to Mabie’s legitimate professional concerns.

Last week, U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty dismissed Mabie’s lawsuit. While he acknowledged Mabie had leveled “serious” allegations involving CIRES, Mabie had failed to advance a plausible claim under any of the federal laws his lawsuit referenced.

“His reliance on federal whistleblower protection statutes is unavailing because they do not extend coverage to him. During the relevant time period, he was not a federal employee (either directly or through a contractor) in a way that relates to the alleged adverse employment actions,” Hegarty wrote in a June 2 order. “Even if he were a covered person, he did not pursue the steps to seek administrative relief before bringing his lawsuit.”

Mabie’s complaint gave a detailed peek into the strife that consumed the time and attention of three other scientists involved with CIRES: Abdalati; Mabie’s supervisor, Terry Bullett; and another researcher Hegarty chose to identify by the initials N.A.Z. given the accusations against him.

In Mabie’s telling, he, Bullett and N.A.Z. collaborated on a project in 2018, but mistrust soon formed between the men. Bullett allegedly believed N.A.Z. had “unspoken agendas” and “deceived us.” Mabie’s notes also contained the allegation that N.A.Z. was receiving an “improper kickback” from a radar vendor, leading Mabie and Bullett to believe their colleague was “acting corruptly.”

N.A.Z. eventually fired Mabie and Bullett from the project, but he emailed them in May 2019 asking if they wished to take part in a new endeavor. Mabie and Bullett rejected the offer, but allowed N.A.Z. to use their data. However, the situation escalated once it became clear that N.A.Z. needed access not only to the data, but to the radar system itself that Bullett operated.

Mabie grew to believe N.A.Z. was a “security risk” and Bullett worried about N.A.Z. getting “illegal” access to the system.

Prior to this new set of concerns, Abdalati had already identified problems with Mabie’s workplace conduct. He had reprimanded Mabie for giving directives to federal employees and not working through his “supervisory chain,” and for calling himself a “whistleblower.”

“This is a very specific term that triggers certain responsibilities on the federal side and should not be loosely used. Calling attention to something you disagree with does not constitute whistleblowing,” Abdalati told Mabie in an email.

Continuing into 2021, the issue of access to the radar system supercharged the antagonism between Bullett and Mabie on the one side and N.A.Z. on the other. Abdalati stepped in to referee and, if needed, admonish.

“You are under no obligation to support future efforts that you do not agree to be a part of, however, when it comes to the equipment, it is CU equipment, and you cannot prohibit the use of that equipment by others, without a compelling justification,” Abdalati told Bullett. He added, “it is clear that there are clashes that go beyond scientific differences.”

Bullett responded that the “erosion of trust” with N.A.Z. was a major obstacle. He told Abdalati how N.A.Z.’s insistence on accessing Bullett’s instruments “is not just ill-advised, but an act of security malfeasance.”

In August 2021, Abdalati sent a proposal to Bullett and N.A.Z. recognizing each researcher’s concern about accessing Bullett’s radar system. Abdalati listed an eight-point plan outlining the responsibilities of each man for sharing the system, such that both could fulfill their responsibilities to their respective project sponsors.

Several days later, Bullett sent an email titled “URGENT” to Rob Redmon, a senior scientist at NOAA, describing an “ongoing security incident where a non-Government person is using a position of authority to forcibly obtain root level computer access for another non-Government person who has previously been identified as a security risk.” His email, in apparent reference to Abdalati and N.A.Z., also suggested there was “possible espionage.”

The government quickly initiated a review of the allegations, and the chief of the information technology division found no credible evidence of a threat to NOAA’s systems or to national security.

Abdalati sent letters to both Bullett and Mabie addressing his concerns over their behavior. The letter to Bullett referenced his continued refusal to provide N.A.Z. system access, as well as Bullett’s unfounded complaint to NOAA. The letter to Mabie described how, with the exception of one meeting in July 2021, “your behavior has been consistently unprofessional and overall disrespectful.”

Afterward, Mabie wrote to human resources of the “bullying tactics” and “concern for the physical safety of myself.”

“I take these statements very seriously, as does campus, and I’d like to understand what you mean,” Abdalati told Mabie, encouraging Mabie to file reports with various assistance offices at CU if he desired their intervention.

Mabie filed his federal lawsuit in October 2021, claiming Abdalati violated whistleblower protection law and the Sherman Antitrust Act, which forbids unreasonable restrictions on market competition.

The university moved to dismiss the lawsuit, claiming Mabie had not articulated any conspiracy to restrict trade, nor had he shown Abdalati retaliated against him as a whistleblower.

In response to the motion, Mabie argued Abdalati’s scolding letter to him amounted to discipline that harmed his “professional reputation and standing.” He also accused Abdalati, for the first time, of potentially being “a foreign agent engaged in acts of espionage.”

Hegarty, the magistrate judge, largely sidestepped the substance of the allegations by determining Mabie had not clearly outlined how he was eligible for whistleblower protections for government contractors, given only a “tangential relationship” between his job and a federal contract. Furthermore, Mabie, who represented himself in the litigation, had not followed the steps required to pursue an administrative claim before a judge could hear his lawsuit.

Although Mabie did file one complaint with the U.S. Department of Commerce’s inspector general in 2018, “Plaintiff complains of many retaliatory acts that occurred in the years afterwards, but presumably, he brought none of them to the Inspector General’s attention,” Hegarty wrote.

There was also no viable claim of a Sherman Act violation for an anticompetitive conspiracy, Hegarty concluded.

Mabie told Colorado Politics he was surprised the ruling came in the absence of Commerce Department findings about his 2018 complaint, but he nonetheless understood the magistrate judge’s rationale.

“I believe his ruling was correct and the case was dismissed because of errors I made as a pro se litigant,” Mabie said. “It was an honor to be able to present my case to the court, and I am thankful to Judge Hegarty for his hard work and consideration.”

A spokesperson for the University of Colorado did not offer any comment on the decision.

The case is Mabie v. Abdalati.