Taina v. Wilkie ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •        NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
    United States Court of Appeals
    for the Federal Circuit
    ______________________
    JOSEPH A. TAINA,
    Claimant-Appellant
    v.
    ROBERT WILKIE, SECRETARY OF VETERANS
    AFFAIRS,
    Respondent-Appellee
    ______________________
    2017-1829
    ______________________
    Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for
    Veterans Claims in No. 15-2017, Judge Mary J. Schoelen.
    ______________________
    Decided: April 10, 2019
    ______________________
    KENNETH M. CARPENTER, Law Offices of Carpenter
    Chartered, Topeka, KS, for claimant-appellant.
    ERIC PETER BRUSKIN, Commercial Litigation Branch,
    Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Wash-
    ington, DC, for respondent-appellee. Also represented by
    MARTIN F. HOCKEY, JR., ROBERT EDWARD KIRSCHMAN, JR.,
    JOSEPH H. HUNT; BRIAN D. GRIFFIN, DEREK SCADDEN, Of-
    fice of General Counsel, United States Department of Vet-
    erans Affairs, Washington, DC.
    2                                            TAINA v. WILKIE
    ______________________
    Before O’MALLEY, TARANTO, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.
    O’MALLEY, Circuit Judge.
    This appeal was originally scheduled for oral argument
    on September 5, 2018. On August 17, 2018, however, we
    stayed this case pending an en banc decision in Procopio v.
    Wilkie, No. 18-1721. Once this court issued its decision in
    that case, see Procopio v. Wilkie, 
    913 F.3d 1371
    (Fed. Cir.
    2019), we ordered the parties to file supplemental briefs
    explaining how the decision in Procopio impacts this case.
    See Dkt. No. 38.
    In his supplemental brief, Appellant Joseph Taina
    asked us to reverse the underlying Court of Appeals for
    Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”) decision and remand
    his case to be readjudicated consistent with Procopio.
    Dkt. No. 39. The government has also indicated that, in
    light of Procopio, we should remand this case to the Veter-
    ans Court. Dkt. No. 41; see also Dkt. Nos. 44, 45. The par-
    ties’ requests for remand are now before us.
    The decision of the Veterans Court is vacated and this
    appeal is remanded to the Veterans Court with instruc-
    tions that Mr. Taina’s claim for benefits be reconsidered in
    light of Procopio. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
    VACATED AND REMANDED
    COSTS
    Each party shall bear its own costs.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-1829

Filed Date: 4/10/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021