Fired the same day her medical leave was active, she says - then the role reappeared
A military veteran says a cybersecurity company fired her while she was on approved leave for PTSD - then advertised her job.
The worker, a former strategic account executive at SentinelOne, filed a lawsuit in federal court in Nashville on August 12, 2026, alleging the company ended her employment on the same day her military-related medical leave was in effect.
According to the complaint, she is a US Air Force veteran with a documented, permanent 100% service-connected disability. She was hired in June 2024, the filing says, and performed her job satisfactorily. In 2025, she asked for a reasonable accommodation and short-term leave to address post-traumatic stress disorder that the complaint links to her military service. The filing says the company approved the leave.
She went out on leave on July 15, 2025, according to the complaint. On August 12, 2025 - less than a month later - the company terminated her, the filing says. The complaint alleges the termination was retaliation for taking that leave.
The sharpest allegation concerns the reason the worker says she was given. According to the filing, the company said her position had been cut in a reduction in force, or RIF - layoffs tied to restructuring. But the complaint alleges the company "simultaneously sought applicants for Plaintiff's position or a position that was substantially the same as Plaintiff's allegedly eliminated position." The filing describes the stated reason as "pretextual."
The complaint runs on four separate legal tracks. It alleges the firing violated the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, or USERRA, which protects service members who take leave for treatment connected to their service. It alleges disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act, and says the company "failed to engage in the interactive process" - the discussion an employer is generally expected to have with a worker about possible accommodations. It alleges sex discrimination under Title VII, claiming the company kept male employees the filing describes as "lesser qualified and/or had less tenure." And it brings matching claims under the Tennessee Human Rights Act.
For HR professionals, the interest lies in the pattern the complaint describes, whatever a court eventually makes of it. Firing an employee during protected leave tends to invite scrutiny. Doing it while allegedly hiring for the same role, as the complaint claims happened here, can weaken a layoff justification before an employer gets to rely on it. And when one worker sits inside several protected categories at once - veteran status, disability, and sex - a single decision can open the door to claims under several laws in parallel. The filing frames leave management, accommodation discussions, and RIF documentation as connected, not separate - and connected on the same employee.
The worker is seeking reinstatement, back pay, and damages of no less than $4,800,000, plus attorneys' fees and costs, according to the complaint.
The allegations have not been tested in court, and no judge has ruled on any of the claims.
