United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

INTERNAL OPERATING PROCEDURES (IOPs)

Preamble

These IOPs are promulgated pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7264, which provides: "The proceedings of 

the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims shall be conducted in accordance with such rules of 

practice and procedure as the Court prescribes."

These IOPs are separate from and in addition to the Court's Rules of Practice and Procedure and 

are adopted and promulgated for informational purposes and internal instruction and guidance.

Nothing in these IOPs confers any rights or obligations upon parties or individuals, or the Judges, 

the Clerk of the Court, the judicial law clerks, or the staff of the Court, except where mandated by 

statute or by a judicial decision binding upon the Court.

The Board of Judges may modify these IOPs at any time and, for good cause, the Chief Judge may 

extend any time period established herein.

Adopted by the Board of Judges January 9, 1992

Changed September 10, 1992

Revised October 5, 1994

Changed October 25, 1995

Revised June 2, 1997

Changed September 24, 1999

Changed November 10, 1999

Changed November 6, 2000

Changed December 18, 2000

Changed May 29, 2002

Changed February 14, 2003

Changed May 25, 2004

Changed August 1, 2011

Changed July 6, 2012

Changed November 30, 2012

Changed November 5, 2013

Changed April 28, 2015

Changed June 3, 2016

Changed September 21, 2016

Changed July 19, 2019

Changed July 28, 2021

Changed June 29, 2022

Changed October 2, 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Definitions

I. Screening Process

(a) Case Assignment and Conferencing

(b) Duties of the Screening Judge

II. Single-Judge Action

(a) Policy

(b) Procedure

III. Reconsideration, Requests for Panel Decision, Subsequent Appeals, and Matters 

Remanded from the Federal Circuit

(a) Rule 27.1 Motion for Initial Review by Panel

(b) Rule 35 Motion for Reconsideration and/or Request for Panel Decision 

(c) Subsequent Appeals

(d) Matters Remanded from the Federal Circuit

IV. Oral Argument

(a) When Allowed

(b) Format and Time

V. Panel Process

(a) Policy

(b) Forming Panels

(c) Managing the Panel

(d) Panel Action and Separate Statements

(e) Dissolving Panels

VI. Post-Panel Process

(a) Reconsideration

(b) Review

VII. En Banc Process

(a) Policy

(b) Procedure

VIII. Publication of Court Actions

(a) Policy

(b) Designation for Publication

IX. Motions, Consolidation

(a) Motions

(b) Consolidation
X. Internal Circulation of Decisions

(a) Policy

(b) Procedure

XI. Petitions for Extraordinary Writs

(a) Policy

(b) Procedure

XII. Applications for Attorney Fees and Expenses

(a) Procedure

(b) Judge or Panel Assignment in Contested Matters

(c) Bifurcated Applications

(d) Finality

XIII. Court Governance, Management, and Leadership

(a) Governing Principles 

(b) Board of Judges 

(c) Statutory Authority of the Board of Judges and Chief Judge

(d) Additional Delegated Powers

(e) Meetings 

(f) Committees

(g) Representation

(h) Resolutions 

XIV. Standing Panel on Admission and Discipline

XV. Request for Class Certification and Class Action

(a) Policy

(b) Procedure
DEFINITIONS

Author Judge. The Judge responsible for drafting an order, memorandum decision, or opinion of 

the Court.

Board of Judges (BOJ). The BOJ is composed of all Judges serving in regular active service. 

Case. A matter pending or decided by the Court, based on the context of its use herein. 

Central Legal Staff (CLS). The personnel whose primary responsibilities include conferencing 

with the litigating parties and preparing materials for Judges related to cases, motions, and votes.

Chief Judge. The Judge who acts as the head of the Court in accordance with 38 U.S.C. 

§ 7253(d)(1).

Clerk. The Clerk of the Court.

Editors. The personnel who maintain the Court's Style Manual and review all final decisions of 

the Court to make non-substantive suggestions.

En Banc. All eligible and participating Judges acting on a matter together.

Issuance. Issuance occurs when an action of the Court is posted on the Court's docket. 

Judge. Any person appointed by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and 

consent of the U.S. Senate, to serve on the Court. Except where context indicates otherwise, 

"Judge" as used herein includes a Judge serving in regular active service and/or a recalled Senior 

Judge.

Memorandum Decision. A nonprecedential final decision of the Court issued by a single Judge

to dispose of an appeal.

Opinion. A decision of the Court issued by a panel of Judges. Unless otherwise noted, an opinion 

is a precedential decision of the Court.

Order. Any direction or ruling of the Court.

Order of Precedence. The Chief Judge shall have precedence over the Judges of the Court, and 

the other Judges serving in regular active service shall have precedence based on the date of their 

original commissions. A Judge serving in regular active service shall have precedence over a 

Senior Judge. Senior Judges shall have precedence among the Senior Judges based on the date of 

their original commissions.

Panel. A panel consists of multiple Judges (usually three unless the matter is en banc), acting on 

a matter together.
Presiding Judge on a Panel or Senior Judge in the Majority. The Judge on a panel having the 

highest order of precedence is the presiding Judge on the panel, and the Judge having the highest 

order of precedence of the Judges in the majority is the senior Judge in the majority.

Public Office. The personnel responsible for processing cases, assigning them to Judges, and 

interfacing with the parties.

Published. A decision of the Court is published electronically or hard bound, in accordance with 

Section VIII of this IOP.

Quorum. A majority of a multiple-Judge panel constitutes a quorum.

Screening Judge. The Judge initially assigned to review the merits of a matter.

Senior Judge. A recall-eligible retired Judge as contemplated in 38 U.S.C. § 7257. NOTE: "Senior 

Judge" does not refer to status as a presiding or senior Judge on a panel.
1

I. SCREENING PROCESS

(a) Case Assignment and Conferencing.

(1) Separate rosters for assignment of matters to Judges in regular active service are maintained 

for appeals, petitions, motions, and requests for class certification and class action. Except 

as otherwise provided, all matters are assigned on a rotational basis.

(A) Any subsequent appeal of a Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) decision on a matter 

previously remanded by a single Judge generally is referred to the author Judge of the

remanded decision. See Section III(c)(1), below.

(B) If a Judge grants a motion to expedite, or denies a motion to file a late brief, that case 

generally is assigned to that Judge for screening. See Section IX(a)(2)(B), below.

(C) Any petition related to a case already acted upon by a Judge generally is assigned to 

that Judge. See Section XI(a), below.

(2) Senior Judges generally are assigned screening cases and other matters on a rotational 

basis, proportionate to and commensurate with their period of recall service. See Policy for 

the Recall of Senior Judges.

(3) When an appellant is represented in an appeal, CLS generally holds a conference with the 

parties to discuss the issues and encourage joint resolution of the appeal, in whole or in 

part. In appropriate circumstances, including at a Judge's request, CLS also may hold a 

conference when the appellant is pro se or on matters other than the merits of the appeal, 

such as on record disputes, petitions for extraordinary writs, or attorney fee disputes. 

(4) When joint resolution of the entire case cannot be reached at conference or otherwise, the 

case is briefed, and the record of proceedings is prepared and filed. The case is then sent to 

CLS where it is examined for any prior remands and evaluated for inclusion on the CLS 

trends report. With the exceptions noted above, the matter is then generally returned to the 

Public Office for assignment on a rotational basis to a Judge for screening. CLS may be 

asked by the assigned Judge to provide an evaluation of the case and a memorandum 

addressing the issues and possible disposition.

(b) Duties of the Screening Judge.

(1) The screening Judge reviews the case and determines whether the matter warrants singleJudge decision, panel decision, or en banc review. At the start of a period of recall service, 

a Senior Judge must inform the Chief Judge whether or not he or she is potentially available 

to serve on self-initiated panels and/or panels assigned randomly pursuant to Section 

V(b)(1), below. An election of a Senior Judge to serve on panels will dictate whether 

sections 4, 5, or 6, below, apply. The Senior Judge will consult with the Chief Judge and 

the Clerk to determine a date after which the Senior Judge will no longer be eligible for 
2

panel assignment. A Senior Judge potentially available to serve on self-initiated panels may 

decline to serve on some self-initiated panels on a case-by-case basis, generally based on 

the anticipated duration of the matter.

(2) The Court has adopted the standard enumerated in Frankel v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 23 

(1990), to decide whether matters should be decided by a panel or by a single Judge. If the 

screening Judge determines that a matter is of relative simplicity and panel decision is not 

warranted under Frankel, then a single Judge may affirm, reverse, modify, set aside, vacate, 

or remand the decision of the Board.

(3) If the screening Judge determines that a case is appropriate for single-Judge disposition, 

the screening Judge assumes responsibility for the decision and proceeds in accordance 

with Section II, below.

(4) If the screening Judge is eligible to serve on a panel and determines that the case is 

appropriate for panel consideration, the Judge requests that the Clerk create a panel 

composed of the screening Judge and two additional eligible Judges selected at random 

and the matter proceeds in accordance with Section V, below. A screening Judge may 

determine that a matter is appropriate for panel at any time prior to entry of judgment in 

the case.

(5) If a screening Judge in regular active service determines that en banc review is warranted, 

the screening Judge and CLS follow the procedure in Section VII(b)(2), below.

(6) If a Senior Judge is not available to serve on panels and determines that a case assigned for 

screening is appropriate for panel consideration, the matter is returned to the Clerk for 

rotational assignment to a panel in accordance with Section V(b), to include a replacement

for the Senior Judge.

II. SINGLE-JUDGE ACTION

(a) Policy. Generally, memorandum decisions are used for any decision by a single Judge

disposing of an appeal, unless the action is taken pursuant to a motion, in which case an order 

is issued.

(b) Procedure.

(1) Circulation. A screening Judge who determines that a matter is appropriate for singleJudge disposition assumes responsibility for the matter and drafts a memorandum decision 

or an order as appropriate. The screening Judge circulates the decision (except one 

dismissing a case for failure to pay the filing fee or to file a brief) to all Judges for review 

and comment for the period prescribed in Section X(b), below. Within that circulation 

period, any editorial comments are sent to the author Judge, any substantive comments or 

requests for panel consideration are sent to all active and recalled Judges, and any request 
3

for en banc review is sent to CLS with copies to all active and recalled Judges pursuant to 

Section VII, below. A Senior Judge may not participate in calling a circulating case to 

panel unless the Senior Judge is the screening Judge on the matter.

(2) Call for Panel or En Banc Review. If, during the circulation period or any extension thereof, 

two Judges in regular active service request panel consideration based on the criteria in 

Frankel, see Section I(b)(2) above, the screening Judge requests that the Clerk create a 

panel composed of the screening Judge and two additional eligible/available Judges 

selected at random, and the matter proceeds in accordance with Section V, below. If the 

screening Judge is a Senior Judge who is unavailable to serve on the panel, an

eligible/available Judge will be substituted in the general random-rotational manner. See 

Policy for the Recall of Senior Judges. If any Judge in active regular service requests en 

banc consideration, CLS follows the procedure in Section VII(b)(2), below. 

(3) Editor Review. During the circulation period the Court's editors review the draft decision 

and provide non-substantive suggestions to the author Judge.

(4) Final Review and Issuance. If there is no call for panel or en banc consideration, as soon 

as possible after the circulation period has expired and comments and edits have been 

considered, the screening Judge forwards the final memorandum decision or order to the 

Public Office for issuance.

III. RECONSIDERATION, REQUESTS FOR PANEL DECISION, 

SUBSEQUENT APPEALS, AND 

MATTERS REMANDED FROM THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

(a) Rule 27.1 Motion for Initial Review by Panel.

(1) Motions for initial review by panel will be assigned to a Judge pursuant to Rule 27.1. See

also Section IX(a)(2)(B).

(2) If the assigned Judge denies the motion for initial review by panel, the case proceeds in 

the normal course.

(3) If the assigned Judge grants the motion for initial review by panel, the Judge requests 

that the Clerk create a panel composed of that Judge and two additional eligible Judges 

selected at random. See Section I(b)(4). The matter then proceeds in accordance with 

Section V, below.

(b) Rule 35 Motion for Reconsideration and/or Request for Panel Decision.

(1) If a party timely moves for reconsideration of a single-Judge memorandum decision or 

dispositive order, the motion is sent to the author Judge for decision. Reconsideration will 
4

be granted if the author Judge concludes that the movant has demonstrated that the singleJudge decision overlooked or misunderstood a fact or point of law. 

(2) If a party timely moves for panel decision in a case where a single-Judge decision has been 

issued, without first seeking reconsideration by the author Judge, the motion nevertheless 

is referred to the author Judge for potential sua sponte reconsideration. If sua sponte 

reconsideration is granted, the request for panel decision is mooted. Thereafter, if the 

moving party files a motion for reconsideration and/or panel decision of the reconsidered 

decision, the same procedures will be followed.

(3) If a panel decision is requested and the author Judge of the single-Judge decision denies 

reconsideration, the panel motion is forwarded to CLS for preparation of a vote package

containing a vote sheet and a draft order, as well as a recommendation if requested. The 

vote package is forwarded to a panel of three Judges that includes the author Judge of the 

single-Judge decision and two eligible/available Judges, selected in accordance with 

Section V(b)(1), below. If a panel had been previously composed and dissolved in the same 

matter, any subsequent motion for panel decision will be referred to the prior panel, with 

any vacancies filled in the normal process as described in Section V(b)(2).

(4) On review by the assigned panel, the single-Judge decision will be withdrawn and a 

decision of the panel substituted therefor if a majority of the panel finds that the movant 

has demonstrated that 

(A) the single-Judge decision overlooked or misunderstood a fact or point of law and that 

error was prejudicial to the outcome of the case, or 

(B) the single-Judge decision is in conflict with precedential decisions of the Court, or 

(C) the case otherwise raises an issue warranting a precedential decision.

If a majority of the panel finds that the movant has not demonstrated that the single-Judge 

decision should be withdrawn, the panel shall direct that the single-Judge decision remains 

the decision of the Court. In such instance, the panel's decision is nonprecedential and the 

single-Judge decision remains nonprecedential.

(5) A request for panel decision should be given priority consideration, consistent with 

Section V, below. 

(6) If a case issued by a Senior Judge is subject to a motion by the parties for reconsideration 

or panel consideration, the Chief Judge shall determine whether the Senior Judge is 

available to consider the motion and serve on any resultant panel. See Policy for the Recall 

of Senior Judges.
5

(c) Subsequent Appeals.

(1) Of Single-Judge Remands. For a matter that was remanded by a single Judge, readjudicated 

by the agency, and the subject of a subsequent appeal filed at the Court, CLS notifies the 

author Judge that the case appears to be related to one that was previously before the Judge.

If the author Judge determines that the new appeal involves substantially the same issue(s) 

raised in the prior appeal, the Judge retains the case for appropriate disposition and directs 

CLS to have the case assigned to that Judge. If the author Judge determines that the new 

appeal involves new issues, the Judge returns the case for assignment to a Judge 

(potentially including that Judge) according to the normal process, as described in Section 

I(a)(4), above. If the author Judge is not available, the case is assigned according to the 

normal process, as described in Section I(a)(4), above.

(2) Of Panel-Ordered Remands. For a matter that was remanded by a panel of Judges,

readjudicated by the agency, and the subject of a subsequent appeal filed at the Court, CLS 

refers the matter to all available Judges who were part of the underlying decision (either 

panel or en banc). Those Judges decide by majority vote whether the matter involves 

substantially the same issue(s) raised in the prior panel decision and, if so, whether the 

matter should be decided by a single Judge or panel. The panel then directs the Clerk as to 

the appropriate assignment of the case. If none of the original panel Judges is available, the 

appeal is assigned according to the normal process, as described in Section I(a)(4), above.

(d) Matters Remanded from the Federal Circuit.

(1) Of matters that were originally decided by a single Judge. For a matter that was decided 

by a single Judge, was appealed, and was subsequently remanded by the Federal Circuit, 

the Public Office, upon docketing after mandate, assigns the case to the original Judge, if 

available. If the original Judge is not available, the case is assigned according to the normal 

process, as described in Section I(a)(4), above.

(2) Of matters that were originally decided by a panel of Judges. For a matter that was

originally decided by a panel of Judges, was appealed, and was subsequently remanded 

by the Federal Circuit, the Public Office, upon docketing after mandate, refers the matter 

to all available Judges who were part of the underlying decision (either panel or en banc). 

Those Judges decide by majority vote whether the matter involves substantially the same 

issue(s) raised in the prior panel decision and, if so, whether the matter should be decided 

by a single Judge or panel. The panel then directs the Clerk as to the appropriate assignment 

of the case. If none of the original panel Judges is available, the appeal is assigned 

according to the normal process, as described in Section I(a)(4), above.
6

IV. ORAL ARGUMENT

(a) When Allowed. Oral argument is held when ordered by the Court on motion of a party or sua

sponte. Normally, oral argument is heard only by a panel. Only the Court sitting en banc may 

order or grant a request for oral argument en banc.

(b) Format and Time. Argument may be held in person, fully remote, or as a hybrid of the two, 

with the method of participation decided by each panel. Each party usually is allowed 30 

minutes in which to present argument. The panel makes any changes it desires in the format or 

order for presentation of argument, including adjusting the time allowed, limiting the argument 

to certain issues, or altering the usual order of presentation.

V. PANEL PROCESS

(a) Policy. Generally, opinions are used for any decision by a panel disposing of an appeal, unless 

the action is taken pursuant to a motion, in which case the panel issues an order.

(b) Forming Panels.

(1) Panels generally consist of the screening Judge and two other Judges. See Sections I(b)(4) 

and II(b)(2), above. Panel selection is done by the Clerk and is typically random and 

rotational, with due regard to each Judge's availability.

(2) Substitution for an assigned panel member due to recusal or as directed by the Chief Judge

is made by the Clerk at random, with due regard to workload and availability. For travel 

cases, the Chief Judge may direct substitution of panel members for reasons related to the 

nature and location of the travel. 

(3) When a pro se case is forwarded for panel disposition, the matter is generally stayed for 30 

days to permit possible representation of the unrepresented party. In addition, the panel 

may direct that participation of amicus curiae, notwithstanding the stay, be invited by order 

of the Court.

(4) Once a panel is composed, a vacancy does not impair its ability to conduct business so long 

as there is a quorum.

(5) Assignment of a case for panel decision generally is reflected on the public docket, 

including the names of the panel members.

(c) Managing the Panel. After oral argument, or after designation of the panel in a case without 

oral argument, the presiding Judge of the panel generally convenes a conference to discuss and 

tentatively decide the case. At the conference, the senior Judge in the majority assigns 

authorship responsibility for the opinion. The senior Judge in the majority is responsible for 

monitoring the timely processing of the case.
7

(d) Panel Action and Separate Statements.

(1) As soon as possible after drafting responsibility for the opinion is assigned, the author Judge 

circulates the draft decision within the panel for comment. A panel member who plans to 

write a separate statement notifies the other panel members promptly and circulates the 

separate statement within the panel as soon as practicable. The panel majority may then 

modify the draft opinion, and the Judge writing separately may also modify his or her 

statement, until the panel is in agreement that the decision and any separate statement are 

ready to circulate.

(2) The author Judge circulates the panel's draft, including any separate statement, to all Judges 

for review and comment, for the period prescribed in Section X(b), below. (In 

circumstances of exceptional delay, the majority of the panel may circulate the majority 

decision without the statement of a Judge writing a separate statement if the separate 

statement has not been provided.) Within 5 working days, any substantive comments are 

sent to all active and recalled Judges, and any request for en banc consideration is sent to 

CLS, with copies to all active and recalled Judges, for processing in accordance with 

Section VII.

(3) During the 5-day circulation period the Court's editors also review the draft decision and 

provide non-substantive edits to the panel.

(4) If any substantive changes are made to the panel opinion, order, or separate statement, the 

author Judge recirculates the entire decision for 3 working days to permit review and 

comment by the other Judges and the editors. See Section X(b)(2). Recirculation is not 

needed if only non-substantive changes are made.

(5)Unless action is pending on an en banc request, and after any comments and suggested 

editing have been addressed, as soon as practicable the author Judge prepares the final 

opinion or order, with any separate statement, for issuance.

(6) In circumstances of exceptional delay, the majority of the panel may provide notice that 

the majority decision will issue at the end of 5 working days, without any separate 

statement if such statement is not prepared at that time, unless an extension is granted by 

the Chief Judge for good cause. In instances where the Chief Judge is seeking the extension, 

the next most senior Judge will make the good cause determination.

(e) Dissolving Panels.

(1) For cases sent to panel pursuant to Sections I(b)(4) or (6), or called to panel pursuant to 

Section II(b)(2), if the majority of the panel agrees, the case may be returned to the 

screening Judge of the panel for disposition.

(2) Any case returned to a single Judge by a majority of a panel shall, upon circulation of the 

single-Judge decision, be subject to recall to panel by a vote of three Judges of the Court
8

in regular active service. In the event of recall to a panel, the case is assigned to the original 

panel for a panel decision on the matter. 

VI. POST-PANEL PROCESS

(a) Reconsideration. If a party moves for reconsideration of a panel action, the motion is referred 

to CLS and CLS personnel will prepare and send to the panel a vote package containing a vote 

sheet and a draft order, as well as a recommendation if requested.

(b) Review. Any motion by a party for review of a panel decision by the en banc Court is processed 

in accordance with en banc procedures in Section VII, below.

VII. EN BANC PROCESS

(a) Policy. Decisions by the Court sitting en banc are not favored except when necessary to secure 

or maintain uniformity of the Court's decisions or to resolve a question of exceptional 

importance. Generally, opinions are issued for any decision by the en banc Court disposing of 

an appeal unless the action is taken pursuant to a motion, in which case the en banc Court 

issues an order.

(b) Procedure.

(1) Participation.

(A) Judges in regular active service may participate in a vote for en banc review, provided

their votes are submitted within the times prescribed below. Whether or not an eligible 

Judge participated in the vote, all Judges serving in regular active service at the time of 

the vote may participate in consideration of the en banc matter. A Senior Judge may 

not vote on whether to hear a case en banc, but if serving in recall status, may elect to 

participate in consideration of an en banc matter only if the Judge was a member of the 

underlying panel being reviewed by the en banc Court, or if the Judge retired and thus 

became a Senior Judge after having voted on the en banc matter.

(B) A Judge appointed to the Court after a case has been selected for en banc review may

participate in that consideration provided oral argument (or conferencing without oral 

argument) has not taken place prior to the appointment of the Judge. The Clerk shall 

promptly inform any newly appointed Judge of the time and place of any en banc oral 

argument or conferencing scheduled to take place after appointment of the Judge, and 

the Judge may participate in any such consideration if available to do so, but if not so 

available, the Judge shall not be eligible to participate in the decision or any motion for 

reconsideration.
9

(C) A Judge who elects recusal from en banc consideration is not part of the en banc voting 

or panel review from the point of recusal forward. 

(D) Assignment of a case for en banc review generally is reflected on the public docket.

(2) Request for En Banc Review.

(A) At the Request of a Judge. A screening Judge in active service who requests en banc 

review, or a Judge in active service requesting en banc consideration of a matter 

circulating prior to issuance (either by a single Judge or by a panel), notifies all Judges 

and submits to CLS a memorandum in support of the request. CLS then circulates to 

all Judges serving in regular active service formal notice of the request, the 

accompanying memorandum, and a vote sheet. The formal notice (1) advises that the 

request will fail unless, during the voting period of 5 working days, at least a majority

of the Judges support the request, (2) advises that the case will not proceed to any 

pending disposition until the expiration of the voting period, and (3) specifies the last 

day of the voting period.

(i) If a majority of the eligible Judges do not support the request during the 5-day voting 

period, the case proceeds to disposition and a docket notation is made regarding the

failed request for en banc review.

(ii) If at least a majority of the eligible Judges support the request, the matter proceeds 

in accordance with Section VII(b)(3), below.

(B) On Motion of a Party.

(i) If a party moves for en banc review, CLS circulates to all eligible Judges the motion 

and a formal notice (1) advising that en banc consideration is either appropriate or 

inappropriate, (2) advising that the motion will be denied unless, during a voting 

period of 5 working days, at least four of the eligible Judges request that the Court 

seek a response from the other party, and (3) specifying the last day of the voting 

period. 

(ii) If during the 5-day voting period fewer than four eligible Judges have requested 

that the non-moving party be ordered to file a response to the motion, no response 

is ordered and the motion is denied. When a motion for en banc consideration is 

denied without seeking a response from the non-moving party, CLS prepares a per 

curiam order of denial that is circulated to the participating Judges and published 

by the Chief Judge on the fifth working day after the order began circulation, unless 

otherwise directed for good cause. Separate statements are not encouraged and will 

not be issued with the Court's order unless submitted in time to be so issued. If a 

separate statement is not timely prepared, the denial order may be issued and any 

separate statement may be issued at a later time and published with the denial order; 

however, a separate statement may not be issued if not prepared and issued within 
10

10 days of the issuance of the order denying the motion for en banc review, unless 

an extension is granted for good cause. Good cause determinations are made by the 

Chief Judge. In instances where the Chief Judge is seeking the extension, the next 

most senior Judge will make the good cause determination.

(iii) If during the 5-day voting period at least four eligible Judges have requested a 

response from the non-moving party, the Clerk issues a standard order seeking a 

response as to the motion for full Court consideration. A majority of the eligible 

Judges may elect to modify the Clerk's standard order for a response. Once the 

response is filed (or the time period expires and no response is filed), CLS 

circulates to all participating Judges the motion requesting en banc consideration, 

any response, and a vote sheet directing all participating Judges to vote for or 

against consideration of the matter en banc. CLS provides for a voting period of 

10 working days and will specify the last day of the voting period.

(a) If, upon the expiration of the 10-day voting period, at least a majority of the 

participating Judges do not vote to grant the motion, the motion is denied. When 

a motion for en banc consideration is denied after a response from the nonmoving party has been sought, CLS promptly prepares the order of denial, 

which is circulated to the participating Judges. Any participating Judge 

intending to write a separate statement must notify the participating Judges of 

such intent within 5 working days from the date of circulation of the denial 

order and must submit such separate statement to the participating Judges no 

later than 10 working days after the date of circulation of the denial order. A 

Judge who wishes to join a separate statement must notify the participating 

Judges of the intent to do so no later than 3 working days after the separate 

statement is submitted. Any adjustments to the denial order will be made 

promptly and any adjustment to any separate statement must be made within 

the same amount of time taken to adjust the denial order. If a separate statement 

is not timely prepared, the denial order may be issued and any separate 

statement may be issued at a later time and published with the denial order; 

however, a separate statement may not be issued at all if not prepared and issued 

within 10 days of the issuance of the order denying the motion for en banc 

review, unless an extension is granted by the Chief Judge for good cause. In 

instances where the Chief Judge is seeking the extension, the next most senior 

Judge will make the good cause determination.

(b) If within the 10-day voting period at least a majority of the eligible Judges vote 

to grant the motion, the motion for en banc consideration is approved and the 

matter proceeds in accordance with Section VII(b)(3), below.

(3) En Banc Review Granted. If an internal request for en banc review is granted, the Clerk 

generally issues an order to that effect. If a motion for en banc review is granted, the en 

banc Court issues an order to that effect, which also withdraws the prior decision. 

Thereafter the Chief Judge, as presiding Judge, generally convenes a conference or directs 
11

the Clerk to schedule oral argument, as appropriate (see Section IV, above), to be followed 

by a conference. The senior Judge in the majority assigns authorship responsibility. If there 

is no majority, the presiding Judge on the en banc panel determines the consensus of the 

panel on how to proceed, and the panel so proceeds. 

(4) Drafting and Issuance of En Banc Opinion or Order.

(A) Drafting. As soon as possible after drafting responsibility is assigned, the author Judge 

circulates the initial draft to all participating Judges for comment. Judges promptly 

indicate whether they will join the circulated draft and, if joining, offer any edits or 

revisions. 

(B) Circulation of the Majority Draft. Once the majority agrees on a draft, it is circulated 

to all participating Judges. By 5:00 p.m. on the fifth working day after the proposed 

draft is circulated, any substantive comments are sent to all participating Judges and 

any Judge who intends to write a separate opinion or statement so notifies the en banc 

panel. Such separate statement is then circulated to the other participating Judges as 

soon as practicable but no later than 5:00 p.m. on the 10th working day after the day 

on which the proposed majority draft was circulated.

(C) Re-Circulation. Within 10 working days after receipt of any separate opinion or 

statement, the majority decision may be modified in response and, whenever 

substantively modified, will be re-circulated to the en banc panel. Within 5 days of the 

re-circulation, any Judge who intends to write or modify a separate opinion or statement 

so notifies the en banc panel. Such separate statement is then circulated to the en banc 

panel as soon as practicable but no later than 5:00 p.m. on the 10th working day after 

the day on which the proposed en banc order or opinion was re-circulated. This cycle 

may be repeated as necessary. No separate opinion or statement will be issued unless 

timely circulated to all participating Judges and timely submitted for issuance with the 

Court's opinion. At the request of any participating Judge, for good cause the Chief 

Judge may extend the time to submit a separate opinion or statement for issuance with 

the Court's opinion or order, but the extension may not exceed an additional 30 calendar 

days. In instances where the Chief Judge is seeking the extension, the next most senior 

Judge will make the good cause determination.

(D) Editor Review. The author Judge of the Court's opinion or order forwards to the editors 

for review a copy of the final opinion or order, with any separate opinion or statement, 

as soon as practicable after expiration of all time periods set forth above. Within 

5 working days, the editors provide to the author Judge and to any other writing Judge 

any non-substantive suggestions.

(E) Issuance. Upon incorporation of all final edits, and after all participating Judges have 

had the opportunity to review the final product, the author Judge of the Court's opinion 

or order prepares the final decision, with any separate opinion or statement, for 

issuance. Prior to issuance, the author Judge and any writing Judge may request an 
12

additional review by the editors, particularly in instances where the draft has undergone 

significant revision since the editors' last review.

VIII. PUBLICATION OF COURT ACTIONS

(a) Policy. All dispositive panel actions are submitted for publication in the Veterans Appeals 

Reporter and for electronic publication on WESTLAW and LEXIS, except that dispositive 

panel actions based on an uncontested motion to dismiss, terminate, or remand a matter will 

not be submitted for publication in the Veterans Appeals Reporter. Nondispositive panel 

actions are ordinarily sent only to the parties. However, any nondispositive panel action may 

be submitted for publication in the Veterans Appeals Reporter and/or for electronic publication 

on WESTLAW and LEXIS at the direction of the panel. All single-Judge dispositive actions 

are submitted for electronic publication. All nondispositive single-Judge actions are sent only 

to the parties unless they are designated for electronic publication by the single Judge.

(b) Designation for Publication. Designation of an action of the Court for publication in the 

Veterans Appeals Reporter, other than as noted above, may be requested by any Judge. The 

requesting Judge circulates a justification statement to all Judges serving in regular active 

status and the matter is published upon majority approval of the BOJ.

IX. MOTIONS, CONSOLIDATION

(a) Motions.

(1) Action by the Clerk. The Clerk disposes of uncontested or routine procedural motions in

accordance with the Court's Rules of Practice and Procedure and as otherwise determined 

by the Court.

(2) Action by the Court.

(A) Motions filed in a case generally are assigned by the Public Office to the Judge next in 

rotation, except that

(i) if the case is pending before a panel or a screening Judge, the motion generally is 

sent directly to that panel or screening Judge for disposition, and

(ii) if a Judge has acted on a previous motion in the case, and the case is not yet before 

a panel or a screening Judge, the motion generally is sent to the Judge who acted 

on the previous motion in the case.

(B) If a Judge grants a motion to expedite, denies a motion to file a late brief, or is assigned 

a motion for initial review by panel, that case generally is assigned to that Judge for 

screening.
13

(b) Consolidation. In the interest of judicial economy, matters pending before the Court may be 

consolidated by order of the Court sua sponte or on motion of a party. 

(1) Consolidation by a Single Judge. A single Judge acting as a motions or screening Judge 

may consolidate cases involving the same appellant, or cases where different appellants are

contesting the same decision of the Board, provided none of the proposed cases to be 

consolidated is assigned to another Judge. A Judge who grants a consolidation motion will 

not necessarily be assigned the consolidated case: Screening assignment will be made by 

the Clerk in the normal process.

(2) Consolidation approved by the en banc Court. Any case may be consolidated with any 

other case(s) with the concurrence of a majority of the en banc Court. Notice of the 

proposed consolidation shall be provided to the en banc Court and is deemed approved 

after 5 days, absent objection by at least one-half of the Judges. For cases consolidated at 

panel, the consolidated matter generally shall proceed before the panel that was first 

constituted, unless the Chief Judge, in consultation with the en banc Court, determines 

otherwise based on judicial economy, availability of Judges, or any other appropriate basis.

If none of the cases proposed for consolidation were at panel, the consolidated matter 

generally shall proceed before the screening Judge, if any, assigned the matter having the 

oldest docket number. If none of the cases proposed for consolidation were assigned to a 

screening Judge, the Clerk generally shall assign a screening Judge, and panel members if 

appropriate, in the normal process.

(3) Issuance of Consolidation Order. When consolidation is proposed by the Court sua sponte, 

the Clerk generally shall issue a "Notice and Order of Consolidation," advising the parties 

that absent objection within a defined period of time (generally 7 days), consolidation will 

become effective on a date certain.

X. INTERNAL CIRCULATION OF DECISIONS

(a) Policy. Certain matters are circulated to all Judges for the period indicated in Section X(b), 

below, and shall not issue until after the circulation period has ended. The purpose of 

circulation is to keep each Judge informed of the decisions being issued by other Judges, to 

allow time for any Judge to provide comments or request panel or en banc consideration as 

appropriate, and to provide the editors with sufficient time to review and provide nonsubstantive suggestions to the author Judge. 

(b) Procedure.

(1) Generally, matters are circulated for 5 working days. This includes the following:

(A) Single-Judge memorandum decisions and dispositive orders;
14

(B) Panel opinions, dispositive orders, and precedential nondispositive orders;

(C) Orders granting extraordinary relief; and

(D) Nondispositive orders granting equitable tolling.

(2) The following matters are circulated for 3 working days:

(A) Re-circulated decisions and orders; and 

(B) Decisions and orders in cases where briefing was expedited.

(3) Single-Judge and panel orders granting uncontested motions to dismiss, terminate, or 

remand a matter are circulated for 1 working day.

(4) En banc decisions may not need to be circulated, as the draft will not be final until all 

participating Judges have approved it, but the final draft is sent to the editors for nonsubstantive suggestions.

XI. PETITIONS FOR EXTRAORDINARY WRITS

(a) Policy. Petitions for extraordinary writs generally are assigned to a screening Judge in the

normal course, except that for judicial efficiency purposes, the processes for assignment of

subsequent appeals will also apply to subsequent petitions. See Sections I(a)(1)(C) and III(c).

(b) Procedure.

(1) A petition for an extraordinary writ may be granted by a single Judge or, based on the 

criteria in Frankel (see Section I(b)(2), above), by a panel. Before the Court grants 

extraordinary relief, the respondent(s) will be afforded the opportunity to respond or to 

show cause why the petition should not be granted.

(2) Proceedings on petitions generally are given priority by the Court. 

XII. APPLICATIONS FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND EXPENSES

(a) Procedure. If an application for award of attorney fees and expenses is not contested, it is 

generally handled by the Clerk. If the Secretary opposes any part of the application, the Public 

Office notifies CLS that action is required. CLS evaluates the contested case and if

reasonableness of the requested fee is the only contested issue, CLS conducts a conference 

with the parties to attempt to resolve the disagreement. If the Secretary contests an issue other 

than or in addition to reasonableness, the application is returned to the Public Office for
15

assignment to a Judge. All actions relating to an application will carry the designation "(E)" 

after the docket number.

(b) Judge or Panel Assignment in Contested Matters.

(1) Single Judge. If the Judge who decided the underlying appeal or petition is available, the 

application is assigned to that Judge. If the Judge who decided the underlying appeal or 

petition is not available, or if the application stems from a matter that was handled by the 

Clerk, a Judge is assigned in the normal process. The assigned Judge serves as the screening 

Judge on the matter.

(2) Panel.

(A) If a panel issued the underlying decision, the application is assigned to the author Judge 

of the panel if available. If the author Judge is not available, the application is assigned 

to another available member of the panel based on seniority. If none of the original 

panel Judges is available, the application is assigned in the normal process.

(B) If the assigned Judge determines panel consideration is appropriate, or if the singleJudge decision is called to panel on circulation, the application is assigned to the same 

panel that decided the underlying matter, with Judges assigned as needed, in the normal 

process.

(c) Bifurcated Applications. In the interest of judicial efficiency, if some but not all issues in a 

case have been disposed of and a judgment has been entered, a timely application pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 2412 for attorney fees and expenses regarding those issues normally is held in

abeyance until all issues on appeal have been resolved and an application for attorney fees and 

expenses for the remainder of the appeal is timely received or the time for such an application 

has elapsed. This does not prevent the parties from settling the initial application without 

judicial intervention.

(d) Finality. Once final action has been taken on an application, judgment and mandate in 

connection with the application are entered in accordance with the Court's Rules of Practice 

and Procedure. This is done in addition to the judgment and mandate associated with 

disposition of the merits of the case.

XIII. COURT GOVERNANCE, MANAGEMENT, AND LEADERSHIP

(a) Governing Principles. Court governance policies, procedures, and organizational mechanisms 

provide a means for 

– fostering institutional cohesiveness,

– establishing and maintaining communication channels,

– defining decision-making authorities and processes for making decisions,
16

– planning for and overseeing the effectiveness of Court programs and operations,

– identifying institutional issues and problems and recommending solutions.

Court management is a shared responsibility among all Court officials. This IOP spells out a 

number of these responsibilities in more detail. However, the Court should always act 

consistently with the following supporting principles:

– The Court should take advantage of the talent and experience of its Judges and other 

personnel; for example, in considering appointments to committees, the unique prior 

experience of Judges is a relevant factor, among others, to be considered.

– The Court should seek to foster a cooperative working environment in which good ideas 

are readily shared and where potential problems are discussed before they become serious.

– The Chief Judge should meet regularly with unit executives, other Judges, and top 

managers to discuss important Court-wide issues and to coordinate approaches across 

organizational lines.

(b) Board of Judges. The BOJ is the Court when acting on all matters in which authority or 

responsibility is given to the "Court" by statute. See 38 U.S.C. § 7254(c)(1) ("A majority of 

the judges of the Court shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of the business of the 

Court."). The Chief Judge is a member of the BOJ and acts as the head of the Court in 

accordance with 38 U.S.C. § 7253(d)(1). Senior Judges are not part of the BOJ. 

(c) Statutory Authority of the Board of Judges and Chief Judge. Certain roles and 

responsibilities for the BOJ (Court) and the Chief Judge are prescribed by statute. These are 

summarized as follows:

(1) The Board of Judges (Court):

§ 7253(g)(1)-(3): Prescribe rules regarding judicial misconduct complaints, including 

awards of fees or costs.

§ 7254(b): Determine whether cases are heard by individual Judges or panels and may 

establish procedures for assigning Judges to each panel.

§ 7262: Set the maximum amount for the Court filing fee and establish procedures for 

waiving the filing fee.

§ 7263(b): Allow persons to practice before the Court who are not members of the 

Court's bar.

§ 7264(a): Prescribe rules of practice and procedure.

§ 7268(c): Prescribe rules to protect privacy and security relating to all filings and to public 

availability.

§ 7269(a): Provide for the publication of decisions or non-publication of decisions, with 

the option of transferring the power to except decisions from publication to the Chief Judge.

§ 7281: Appoint a clerk, approve the clerk's deputies and employees, fix and adjust rates 

of pay, and procure the services of experts or consultants.

§ 7282: Submit the budget and make expenditures in order to execute the functions of the 

Court.
17

§ 7284: Fix a fee for comparing, preparing, or copying any record, entry, or transcript. 

§ 7285: Impose registration fees and determine their frequency and amount, and use these 

fees for investigating disciplinary matters or for defraying the costs of conferences and 

public engagements.

§ 7287: Exercise the authority provided to a court of the United States for purposes of 

management, administration, and expenditure of Court funds, if not inconsistent with 

§§ 7251 et seq.

(2) The Chief Judge:

§ 7256: The Chief prescribes the times and places of sessions of the Court.

§ 7257(b)(1), (3): The Chief may recall, if eligible, retired Judges and may remove Judges 

from recall-eligible status in certain instances.

§ 7265(b): Request a U.S. marshal at any session.

§ 7281(g): If there are not at least two other Judges of the Court, the Chief exercises the 

power to adjust pay and hire certain employees, such as the Clerk.

§ 7282(c): Designate certifying officers.

§ 7286: Summon Judges to an annual judicial conference.

§ 7288: Submit an annual report to Congress concerning the workload of the Court, 

including statistics on cases filed, dispositions, and the Court's efficiency. (Per BOJ 

agreement, prior to submission to Congress, the Chief Judge will submit the report to the 

BOJ for their review and comment).

§ 7292(b)(1): Certify interlocutory appeals of legal questions to the Federal Circuit.

§ 7296(d)(3), (g)(1): Transmit information to OPM on retired pay and furnish certificates 

of disability to the President if a Judge retires because of a disability. 

§ 7297(d)(1), (h), (i): Set conditions and amount of annuity deposits and assist with next 

of kin determinations and other estate matters.

§ 7298(d), (e): Undertake periodic reviews of the Judges' retirement fund and submission 

of information, as required, to the President.

(d) Additional Delegated Powers. In addition to the Chief's statutory powers, the BOJ has, on 

occasion, formally delegated the following powers to the Chief: 

(1) On September 26, 1989, the BOJ adopted a resolution authorizing the Chief to hire or 

approve the hiring of subordinate Court personnel who are not heads of offices. The BOJ 

clarified, on July 13, 2015, that BOJ approval "is only necessary for hiring into a CS 16 or 

above position, and that no BOJ approval is needed when promoting an individual to a CS 16 

level when that person was hired into a position at a lower grade but when the position was 

authorized up to the CS 16 level."

(2) On September 25, 2003, the BOJ adopted a resolution granting the Chief the power to 

"exercise supervision over the work of the Clerk . . . on behalf of the [BOJ]" unless the BOJ 

has specified otherwise for a particular matter. The same resolution requires the Clerk to report 

and communicate to the BOJ through the Chief Judge. 
18

(3) On September 10, 2012, the BOJ passed two motions. The first provided that questions as 

to the grade of a position, raised by an employee or management, would be presented to the 

BOJ. The second delegated the authority to fix and adjust the rates of basic pay for positions 

graded at 15 or below to the Chief Judge, "who shall keep the BOJ informed of any significant 

decision." Requests to upgrade any position to a 16 or above "must be decided by the BOJ." 

(4) On April 18, 2016, per BOJ Resolution 01-2016, the BOJ delegated to the Chief Judge the 

authority to submit the Court's budget request each year, and the authority to direct 

expenditures as necessary to execute the functions of the Court, with some limitations.

(e) Meetings. The BOJ meets at the call of the Chief Judge or any three members of the BOJ, and 

meetings may be called to address general business or for limited discussion on a specific issue. 

The BOJ may meet in Executive Session to discuss topics that generally will not be recorded 

with regular meeting minutes. Generally, the BOJ should be provided 30 days' notice of a 

meeting date, and with that notice, should be advised of a reasonable window of time during 

which agenda topics may be submitted. Any Judge in regular active service may timely add an 

agenda item for discussion at a general meeting, and at the close of the agenda-submission 

window, an agenda will be disseminated to the BOJ. Agenda topics submitted after the 

reasonable time window provided will only be included on the agenda if supported by three 

members of the BOJ. BOJ meetings will generally be held quarterly, on the last Wednesday of 

January, April, July, and October. Any Senior Judge may attend any BOJ meeting and, at the 

invitation of the Chief Judge in consultation with the BOJ, may attend any Executive Session 

of the BOJ. Any Senior Judge may submit an agenda item for consideration, and such item 

will be added to the agenda upon the assent of three members of the BOJ. Unless excused by 

the BOJ, the Clerk and the Counsel to the BOJ attend BOJ meetings. Minutes of the BOJ 

meetings are approved and kept by the BOJ. 

(f) Committees. 

(1) General. To assist the BOJ and the Chief Judge, the Chief Judge shall appoint volunteer 

Judges to standing committees on Legislative Affairs; Budget and Finance; Policy and 

Personnel; Information Technology (IT); Outreach; Rules; and Facilities, Public Spaces, 

Art and Design, as well as any additional ad hoc committees deemed helpful by the Chief 

Judge or the BOJ. The Chief Judge will keep the BOJ apprised as to Judges appointed to 

each committee. Periodically, in coordination with the Chief Judge, Judges may rotate their 

committee memberships.

(2) Purpose. The purpose of these committees is to enhance the effective operation of the Court 

by:

-allowing a small group to consider and develop ideas before presenting recommendations 

to the full BOJ or Chief Judge, as appropriate;

-tasking a small group with originating ideas on particular topics as well as addressing 

relevant matters raised outside the committee; and

-alleviating the need for all Judges to participate in the detailed work of each committee. 
19

(3) Process. Committees shall meet as necessary and operate by consensus. The Chief Judge 

shall bring any significant issues to the appropriate committee in a timely manner. When a 

particular subject could fall under more than one committee's purview, one committee may 

take the lead or committees may collaborate. Committees are free to and should consult 

with the Clerk and any member of the Court's staff as may be helpful. Each committee will 

advise and consult with the Chief Judge and full BOJ as necessary. For responsibilities and 

matters prescribed or delegated to the Chief Judge, the committee will provide the Chief 

Judge with a recommendation upon request. For matters requiring action of the Court, and 

thus the BOJ as a whole, the committee will develop a recommendation for full BOJ 

consideration. The mechanics of collaboration between the committee, the full BOJ, and 

the Chief Judge will vary based on the given issue. Factors to be considered may include: 

The significance and genesis of the issue; where ultimate responsibility rests for action on 

the matter; the impact on future Court operations or the Court's budget; and urgency. The 

committee process aspires to balance efficiency with full BOJ participation.

(g) Representation. As head of the Court, the Chief Judge frequently represents the Court in 

external matters, including legislative matters and discussions with Congress and members of 

the Congressional staff. Only the BOJ, however, may authorize the external representation of 

a position on any matter for which authority or responsibility is given to the Court by statute.

If any Judge, including the Chief Judge, is asked for or is otherwise presenting a policy or 

legislative position externally on any such matter that has not been approved by the BOJ, or 

on which the Judge has a position not in accord with that of the BOJ, the Judge should make 

clear to the audience that the BOJ has not rendered a position yet or has a differing view.

(h) Resolutions. Formal decisions of the BOJ may be implemented by issuance of numbered and 

dated BOJ Resolutions or through adoption of policies.

XIV. STANDING PANEL ON ADMISSION AND DISCIPLINE

Pursuant to Misc. Order 1-05 and BOJ Resolution 01-2011, Judges serve on a rotational basis on 

the Court's Standing Panel on Admission and Discipline to review matters arising under the Court's 

Rules of Admission and Practice.

XV. REQUEST FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND CLASS ACTION

(a) Policy. Requests for class certification and class action (RCAs) are decided by panels.

(b) Procedure. If an appeal or petition is not already assigned to a screening judge when an RCA 

is filed, the RCA will be assigned by the Clerk to the Judge next in rotation on the class action 

roster; if the case is assigned to a screening judge, the RCA will be assigned to that Judge. In 

both scenarios, the Clerk concurrently assigns two additional panel members from the class 

action roster. The panel proceeds to act on the RCA pursuant to Rule 23, taking and directing 

action and issuing orders as appropriate. After granting or denying an RCA, the panel 
20

determines whether the matter should continue at panel or whether the panel should be 

dissolved and the matter proceed before a single Judge. See Section V(e).