Court Opinion

ID: 703843
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2012-04-17 05:56:39+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:42:42.972263
License: Public Domain

65 F.3d 187
NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent.  This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision of the Court rendered in a nonprecedential opinion or order.Donald R. JOHNSON, Claimant-Appellant,v.Jesse BROWN, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 95-7046.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Aug. 16, 1995.

Before MICHEL, Circuit Judge, BENNETT, Senior Circuit Judge, and LOURIE, Circuit Judge.
ON MOTION
LOURIE, Circuit Judge.

ORDER

1
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs moves to waive the requirements of Fed.Cir.R. 27(e) and to dismiss Donald R. Johnson's appeal for lack of jurisdiction.  Johnson opposes.

2
In 1991, Johnson filed a request to reopen his claim for entitlement to service connection for aggravation of a pre-existing psychiatric disorder.  The Board of Veterans Appeals denied his claim on the ground that the evidence submitted by Johnson was neither new nor material.  The Court of Veterans Appeals summarily affirmed the Board's decision.  Johnson appealed to this court.

3
Under 38 U.S.C. Sec. 7292, this court may review only challenges to the validity or interpretation of a statute or regulation, or to the interpretation of a constitutional provision, that the Court of Veterans Appeals relied on in its decision.  If an appeal to this court from the Court of Veterans Appeals does not challenge the validity or interpretation of a statute or regulation, or the interpretation of a constitutional provision, Sec. 7292(d) requires this court to dismiss the appeal.  That section states that this court "may not review (A) a challenge to a factual determination, or (B) a challenge to a law or regulation as applied to the facts of a particular case."

4
In his informal brief, Johnson does not challenge the validity or interpretation of a statute or regulation or the interpretation of a constitutional provision.  Thus, this appeal must be dismissed.  See Livingston v. Derwinski, 959 F.2d 224, 225-26 (Fed.Cir.1992).

5
Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

6
(1) The Secretary's motion to waive the requirements of Fed.Cir.R. 27(e) is granted.

7
(2) The Secretary's motion to dismiss is granted.

8
(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.