Court Opinion

ID: 685087
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2012-04-17 01:52:58+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:42:19.436467
License: Public Domain

42 F.3d 1409
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issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision of the Court rendered in a nonprecedential opinion or order.Jerry L. HALL, Sr., Claimant-Appellant,v.Jesse BROWN, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 94-7071.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Nov. 18, 1994.

Before MAYER, Circuit Judge, FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and PLAGER, Circuit Judge.
ON MOTION
ORDER
PLAGER, Circuit Judge.

1
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs moves to waive the requirements of Fed.Cir.R. 27(e) and to dismiss Jerry L. Hall, Sr.'s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.  Hall submits a response.

2
In 1989, the Board of Veterans Appeals denied Hall's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder.  A few years later, the Board denied reopening of his claim for service connection.  The Board determined that Hall had not submitted new and material evidence to support reopening of the claim.  Hall appealed to the Court of Veterans Appeals.  The Court of Veterans Appeals summarily affirmed the Board's decision that Hall's additional evidence did not constitute new and material evidence for purposes of reopening Hall's claim.  Hall 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, Hall argues that the Court of Veterans Appeals failed to consider certain evidence and facts.  Hall thus argues that the Court of Veterans Appeals made inaccurate factual determinations.  As this court has no jurisdiction to conduct such an inquiry, 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.