Case: Cantalicio O. CAGADAS, Claimant-Appellant, v. R. James NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee
Abbreviation: Cagadas v. Nicholson
Decision Date: 2006-12-29
Docket Number: No. 2007-7056
Citation: 213 F. App'x 988
Volume: 21
Reporter: West's Veterans Appeals Reporter
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Cantalicio O. CAGADAS, Claimant-Appellant, v. R. James NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before RADER, Circuit Judge, FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and SCHALL, Circuit Judge.
Pages: 988–989

Head Matter:
Cantalicio O. CAGADAS, Claimant-Appellant, v. R. James NICHOLSON, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 2007-7056.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Dec. 29, 2006.
Cantalicio O. Cagadas, pro se.
Before RADER, Circuit Judge, FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and SCHALL, Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
ORDER
Upon review of this recently docketed appeal, the court considers whether the appeal should be dismissed as untimely.
Cantalicio O. Cagadas claimed service connection for a heart condition. The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims affirmed the decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals that denied his claim. The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims entered judgment on August 14, 2006. Cagadas v. DVA, No. 04-0956. The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims received Ca-gadas's notice of appeal on October 31, 2006, which is 78 days after entry of judgment.
Cagadas' appeal was due within 60 days of the entry of judgment, or by October 13, 2006. 38 U.S.C. § 7292(a); 28 U.S.C. § 2107(b); Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1). Because the notice was untimely filed, the appeal must be dismissed. See Sofarelli Assoc., Inc. v. United States, 716 F.2d 1395 (Fed.Cir.1983).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) This appeal is dismissed as untimely.
(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.