Case: Darrell J. HAMPTON, Claimant-Appellant, v. R. James NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee
Abbreviation: Hampton v. Nicholson
Decision Date: 2006-03-09
Docket Number: No. 05-7145
Citation: 172 F. App'x 1007
Volume: 20
Reporter: West's Veterans Appeals Reporter
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Darrell J. HAMPTON, Claimant-Appellant, v. R. James NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before NEWMAN, MAYER, and GAJARSA, Circuit Judges.
Pages: 1007–1007

Head Matter:
Darrell J. HAMPTON, Claimant-Appellant, v. R. James NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 05-7145.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
March 9, 2006.
Rehearing En Banc Denied June 15, 2006.
Before NEWMAN, MAYER, and GAJARSA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Darrell J. Hampton appeals the dismissal of his petition for a writ of mandamus as moot. Hampton v. Nicholson, 19 Vet.App. 514 (2005). Because the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims granted Hampton's motion for a panel hearing on his underlying appeal, 03-927, it did not abuse its discretion in dismissing his petition for the writ, which requested extraordinary procedural action in aid of that appeal. See Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394, 403, 96 S.Ct. 2119, 48 L.Ed.2d 725 (1976) (providing the standard for granting a writ of mandamus); Lamb v. Principi, 284 F.3d 1378 (Fed.Cir.2002) (finding jurisdiction to review denials of a writ of mandamus by the Veterans Court). Therefore, we affirm.