Court Opinion

ID: 9895250
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-06 16:02:32.474965+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:51.895466
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-2195    Document: 8      Page: 1   Filed: 11/06/2023

           NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                  ______________________

             JAMES NATHANIEL DOUSE,
                 Claimant-Appellant

                             v.

  DENIS MCDONOUGH, Secretary of Veterans Af-
                    fairs,
             Respondent-Appellee
            ______________________

                        2023-2195
                  ______________________

   Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims.
                ______________________

    Before LOURIE, MAYER, and STARK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
                        ORDER
   Having considered the parties’ responses to the court’s
August 3, 2023, order to show cause, we dismiss the appeal.
    Section 7292 of Title 38 of the U.S. Code gives us juris-
diction to review final decisions of the United States Court
of Appeals for Veterans Claims. To be timely, a notice of
appeal must be received by the Veterans Court within 60
days of the entry of judgment. See 38 U.S.C. § 7292(a); see
also 28 U.S.C. § 2107(b); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B). That
Case: 23-2195      Document: 8   Page: 2   Filed: 11/06/2023

2                                      DOUSE v. MCDONOUGH

statutorily prescribed time for filing appeals from the Vet-
erans Court to this court is jurisdictional. See Wagner v.
Shinseki, 733 F.3d 1343, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2013); see also
Henderson v. Shinseki, 562 U.S. 428, 438–39 (2011) (indi-
cating jurisdictional restrictions on the time for taking an
appeal under section 7292(a)). The only decision of the Vet-
erans Court that James Nathaniel Douse’s filings reference
is an October 24, 2022, decision. * And judgment in that
case was entered more than 60 days before the date of his
notice of appeal. Moreover, as we previously explained to
Mr. Douse, given the failure to timely appeal that judg-
ment, mandamus review would likewise be inappropriate.
See In re Douse, No. 2023-124, slip op. at 3 (Fed. Cir. Apr.
17, 2023).
    Accordingly,
    IT IS ORDERED THAT:
    (1) The appeal is dismissed.
    (2) Each side to bear its own costs.
                                             FOR THE COURT

November 6, 2023
     Date

    *   Mr. Douse references a May 2023 remand decision
of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals and a May 2023 Rating
Decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional
Office. However, Mr. Douse has not identified, and we are
not aware of, any authority that would permit us to directly
review the decisions of the Board or the Regional Office.