Gilbert v. Dept. Of Veterans Affairs ( 2012 )


Menu:
  • NOTE: This order is nonprecedential
    United States Court of Appeals
    for the Federal Circuit
    RONALD D. GILBERT,
    Claimant-Appellant,
    V.
    ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS
    AFFAIRS,
    Respondent-Appellee.
    2012-7006
    Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for
    Veterans Claims in case no. 10-0705, Judge Lawrence B.
    I-Iagel.
    ON MOTION
    Before LoURIE, SCHALL, and DYK, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM.
    ORDER
    Upon review of the briefs, the court determines
    whether this appeal should be dismissed for lack of juris-
    diction.
    GILBERT V. SHINSEKI 2
    Ronald D. Gilbert served on active duty in the United
    States Army from October 1976 to October 1977. He
    appeals from a decision of the United States Court of
    Appeals for Veterans Claims (Veterans Court) that af-
    firmed a decision by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals
    denying Gilbert entitlement to benefits for hypertension
    and declining to reopen Gilbert’s previously-denied claim
    regarding benefits for schizophrenia
    Our jurisdiction to review decisions of the Veterans
    Court is limited by statute. Under 
    38 U.S.C. § 7292
    (a),
    this court has jurisdiction over rules of law or the validity
    of any statute or regulation, or an interpretation thereof
    relied on by the court in its decision. This court may also
    entertain challenges to the validity of a statute or regula-
    tion, and may interpret constitutional and statutory
    provisions as needed for resolution of the matter. 
    38 U.S.C. § 7292
    (0). ln contrast, except where an appeal
    presents a constitutional question, we lack jurisdiction
    over challenges to factual determinations or laws or
    regulations as applied to the particular case. 
    38 U.S.C. § 7292
    (d)(2).
    Gilbert asks this court to account for the evidence and
    provide reasons for rejecting evidence favorable to him.
    These are purely factual issues. Also, Gjlbert asserts that
    the Veterans Court decided constitutional issues and
    identifies the Board’s determination that his August 2005
    statement was cumulative as such, but this too is a fac-
    tual issue, not a constitutional one. As such, this court
    lacks jurisdiction to review the issues presented in Gil-
    bert’s appeal.
    Accordingly,
    4 IT ls ORDERED THAT:
    (1) The appeal is dismissed.
    l (2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
    3 GILBERT V. SHINSEKI
    FoR THE CoURr
    Jl.ll_ 3 l zol`z /s/ J an Horbaly
    Date J an Horbaly
    clerk
    cc: Ronald D. Gilbert
    K. Elizabeth WitWer, Esq.
    323 ii\`=§.i>i=eas\=on
    u's"riitili=§tn AL cm cu\T
    JUL 3 '|12(]12
    JAN HORBAlY
    CLEBK
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2012-7006

Filed Date: 7/31/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014