THI S VERSI ON I NCL UDES AN ERRATA DA TED 10OCT00-e
UNITED STAT ES COURT OF AP P EALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

N O

. 97-1244

L OR EN Z O J. A R MENTR OS , A PP EL L ANT ,

V

. H ER SH EL W. G OBER , A C TI NG S EC RE T A RY O F V ET ER A N S A FF A I RS , A PPEL L EE

.

B ef o re IV E R S , S T E IN B E RG , an d G RE E N E , Ju dge s .

O R D E R On August 5, 1998, the pro se a ppellant filed a

brief, consisting of an Informal B rief F orm with attache d pag es numbere d 1-33. He alleg es a f ailure on the part of the Depa rtment of Ve tera

ns Affa irs (VA) to obtain VA medica l rec ords per tinent to his case prior to a Ma rch 1990 V A re g ional office (R O) ad

j u d i cation (R. at 324-27) of his September 1989 claim (R. at 222) of clea r and unmistakable er

ror ( CUE) in a J une 1978 VARO dec ision (R. at 200). See, e .g., Appellant' s I nformal Br ief (B r.) at 1-2; Appellant' s Br . at 2-3. On N ovember 9, 1998, the Secr etar

y filed a motion for single -judg e af

firmanc e.
I n Ha y re v . W est , 188 F.3d 1327 (F ed. Cir. 1999) , the U.S. Court of Appea ls f or the Fe dera l Circuit (Fe dera l Circuit) handed dow n an opinion, the holding of which thi s Court has cha

rac terized as follows: " [A] n RO' s failure to obta in [servic e medical rec ords] . . . may have c onstitut ed a g rave proce dural err or and, if so, then the RO dec ision at issue . . . was not final. See id. at 1335 (' if the Court of Appea ls for Ve tera ns Claims finds t hat the RO breache d the dut y to assist in 1972, then the 19 72 RO deci si on is no t f in al f or p urp os es o f di rectapp eal ')." Sim mo ns v . W est , 13 Vet.App. 501, 506 (2000). The Fe dera l Circuit then vacated an e arlier decision of this Court an d re manded the
a pp e a l to thi s Co ur

t f or fu rt he r c on sid e ratio n; t

he a pp e a l is no w p e nd ingbe fo re a pa ne l of the Court

. Hayre v. Gobe r , U.S. Vet. App. No. 95-854 (supplemental briefing order ed Apr il 14, 2000). At issue is, int e r a lia , wh e the r the Court may e xer c ise jur isd ic tio n ov e r an RO de c isi on that ha s no t be c ome final due to the sor

t of err or identified in Ha y re v . W est , su pra , absent a

jurisdiction-confe rring Notice of Disag ree ment (NOD ) as to that RO dec ision. Se e ge ne ra lly Ve te ra ns ' Judic ia l Re vie w A c t, Pub . L . N o. 10 0- 68 7 § 40 2, 10 2 St a t. 4 10 5, 41 22 (19 88 ) (fo un d at 3 8 U .S. C. § 72 51 no te ); Velez
v . W est , 1 1 V e t.A

pp . 1 48 , 1 57 (1 99 8) (" Cour t ha s n o ju ri sd ic tio n o ve r a

n is su e a bs e nt a po stNovember

18, 1988, NOD, e x pressingdisag ree ment with a n RO' s decision on that issue or with an RO ' s fa ilure to ad

jud ic a te that [iss ue ]" ); see also Barrera v . Gober , 122 F.3d 1030, 1031 (F ed. Cir. 19 97 ); Gran tha m v . B ro wn , 114 F.3d 1156, 1157 ( Fe d. Cir. 1997), r e v 'g 8 Vet.App. 228 ( 1995). But
see 38 U.S.C. § 7111 (permitting a ppeal to this Court of Boa rd dec ision r egar ding CUE in pr ior B o ar d d e c i s i o n , w h i c h i s an o r i g i n a l c l a i m t o t h e B o ar d , w i t h o u tj u r i s d i c t i o n - c o n f e r r i n g N O D )

. In view of the above a

nd in the interest of j u d i ci al economy , the Court will postpone further proce eding s in the instant case pe nding the issuance of an opinion in Ha

y re v . G ob e r.2

Up on c on sid e ratio n o f t

he fo re g oin g , it

is ORDERED, s ua spont e, that this matter is stay ed pending the outcome of Hayre v. Gobe r , or fu rt he r o rd e r o f t

he Court

. DA T E D: Oc t o b e r 3 , 2 0 0 0 P E R C U RI A M.