There has been a lot of discussion so far in this thread of several issues that only are tangentially relevant. I hate to say this but, (in some respects, it should be obvious/apparent), some issues and cases really need to be addressed by an attorney.
(Sometimes, I get the feeling that folks- perhaps with some measure of reason- feel like they
should be able to represent themselves and get a good result. Television and movies seem to make people believe that just being able to argue a point and being "right" is a recipe for success. It is somewhat strange to me for these reasons; people can understand the general problems with, for example, cars. Or for health issues. But, unless you are a mechanic or a doctor, most folks do not try to fix their own transmission or the bone sticking out of their broken leg. Is it possible for folks to do this? Yes. It is likely to work out well? No. I also get, and understand the problems with paying for legal services. As to me, personally, I wish I was wealthy and could just take on every case of an injustice and fight it out for folks. There are tons of cases that need legal help from an attorney. But, the reality is that money does not fall out of the sky. The practice of law is my job; I am not rich; I have steep student loan bills every month to pay (along with the bills that everyone has to pay), and, while I would love to take cases without guaranteed payment, this is not a feasible business model, generally. Unfortunately, it just doesn't work that way. I have tried that model before and have sunk many hundreds of hours into cases that did not return a cent).
This area of law is not rocket science. At the same time, taking me, personally, as an example, I went to law school and have practiced in this very narrow area of law for more than 9 years (I have 14 years as an attorney). On my last check with the Court of Federal Claims website, I am by far the most experienced practitioner in this area of law. (I have more than 29 cases before the Court; this is a multiple of cases more than any other practitioner before the Court, probably by a factor of 300%).There are very few attorneys nation-wide who practice in this area of law at all. Much fewer who practice in all levels of these cases (from MEB, PEB, to Post-PEB appeals, VARR's, to BCMR applications, and finally to appeals in Court; I actually think I am the only attorney who practices regularly across all levels of DES cases). None of this is to make me sound great. It is just an observation that many folks think the answers or issues are "easy." They are not (but, mainly because it takes a solid understanding of many rules- none of which are very complicated- along with experience with the issues and an ability to write in a way that addresses the issues).
That said, I don't think the draft motion in the earlier post is horrible by any means. It is by far not inclusive of all of the issues that should be raised in a "complete" motion (my thoughts are that it should be much longer, comply with the RCFC for listing the arguments, facts, citations of law, contents, etc.- though, some of these should be excused because of the pro se filing...that said, I think, with "leniency" in pro se filings, it is possible to discern the arguments; I can definitely see the "path" to a much stronger case for a "win" with a fuller motion and brief). I would be very happy if my thoughts about the "need for an attorney" are wrong and you prevail. I think you have at least hit on most of the important "big picture" issues.
I hope it works out well, for you
@danieldresen . On the issues, I think you should prevail. As it stands, I think the government has not filed a valid motion for dismissal and has not answered the complaint. This only can work to your favor.