Mayer v. Brown, No. 94-7038
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit |
| Writing for the Court | Before MAYER, MICHEL, and LOURIE; MAYER |
| Citation | 37 F.3d 618 |
| Parties | James P. MAYER, Claimant-Appellant, v. Jesse BROWN, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 94-7038 |
| Decision Date | 23 September 1994 |
Page 618
v.
Jesse BROWN, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.
Federal Circuit.
Rehearing Denied Nov. 25, 1994.
James P. Mayer, submitted pro se.
Charles F. Beall, Jr., Atty., Commercial Litigation Branch, Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC, submitted, for respondent-appellee. With him on the brief were Frank W. Hunger, Asst. Atty. Gen., David M. Cohen, Director and Anthony H. Anikeeff, Atty. Of counsel was Harriett T. Heywood. Also on the brief, was Nicole Sideris, Office of the Gen. Counsel, Dept. of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC, of counsel.
Before MAYER, MICHEL, and LOURIE, Circuit Judges.
MAYER, Circuit Judge.
James P. Mayer appeals the November 17, 1993, judgment of the United States Court of Veterans Appeals, No. 92-639, dismissing his appeal from the decision by the Chairman of
Page 619
the Board of Veterans Appeals denying his request for reconsideration of his claim. 6 Vet.App. 175. We affirm, but on different grounds.Background
On November 7, 1990, the Board of Veterans Appeals (board) denied Mayer's request for an increase in service-connected disability rating for his knee disorder. Mayer did not appeal the decision. More than 17 months later, however, he did file a motion for reconsideration with the Chairman of the board (Chairman). The Chairman denied reconsideration on April 29, 1992.
Mayer then appealed the denial of his reconsideration request to the Court of Veterans Appeals (CVA), which dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Mayer filed a motion for reconsideration by the CVA, which that court stayed pending resolution of another case, Patterson v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 362 (1993), in which the CVA addressed whether it may review a denial of a veteran's reconsideration request by the Chairman.
On November 17, 1993, the CVA dismissed Mayer's appeal, relying on Patterson. In Patterson, the court determined that it did have jurisdiction over decisions of the Chairman denying reconsideration of a board decision, but held that it would not exercise that jurisdiction where the veteran did not allege new evidence or changed circumstances as grounds for reconsideration. 5 Vet.App. at 364. Because Mayer's petition for reconsideration raised no new evidence or changed circumstances, the CVA dismissed the appeal.
Mayer then filed this appeal. The Secretary of Veterans Affairs moved to dismiss, but a panel of this court denied the motion and ordered the Secretary to brief the CVA's interpretation of the statutes and cases involved in Patterson.
Discussion
Our jurisdiction to review decisions of the CVA is strictly limited by statute. 38 U.S.C. Sec. 7292 (Supp. IV 1992); Livingston v. Derwinski, 959 F.2d 224, 226 (Fed.Cir.1992). We may review a decision of the CVA with respect to the interpretation of any statute relied on by that court, including the CVA's interpretation of its jurisdictional statutes. 38 U.S.C. Sec. 7292(a); Albun v. Brown, 9 F.3d 1528, 1530 (Fed.Cir.1993). In this case, we consider whether the CVA correctly interpreted its jurisdictional statute to allow review of decisions by the Chairman denying requests for reconsideration. We conclude that it did not. 1
The CVA's jurisdiction is limited by statute to review of "decisions of the Board of Veterans' Appeals." 38 U.S.C. Sec. 7252(a) (Supp...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bailey v. West, No. 98-7001
...limit and thereby exercise jurisdiction over a late-filed notice of appeal--we have jurisdiction over this matter. See Mayer v. Brown, 37 F.3d 618, 619 (Fed.Cir.1994) (Federal Circuit reviews Court of Veterans Appeals' interpretation of its jurisdictional statutes). Our review is limited to......
-
Bates v. Nicholson, No. 04-7085.
...provisions." Such legal interpretations are reviewed without deference. Jones v. Brown, 41 F.3d 634, 637 (Fed.Cir.1994); Mayer v. Brown, 37 F.3d 618, 619 As we confirmed in Cox, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims "has the power to issue writs of mandamus in aid of its jurisdiction und......
-
Garcia v. Wilkie, 2018-1038
...to review the denials of the motions to reconsider and the motion to vacate. Garcia , 29 Vet.App. at 56 (relying on Mayer v. Brown , 37 F.3d 618, 619 (Fed. Cir.1994) (discussing motions to reconsider), and Harms v. Nicholson , 20 Vet.App. 238, 243 (2006) (discussing motions to vacate) ).4 T......
-
Wick, Matter of, No. 94-7017
...a cause under review'.") (quoting Mitchell v. Maurer, 293 U.S. 237, 244, 55 S.Ct. 162, 165, 79 L.Ed. 338 (1934)); see also Mayer v. Brown, 37 F.3d 618, 619 (Fed.Cir.1994) (Federal Circuit reviews Court of Veterans Appeals with respect to its interpretation of jurisdictional statute); 38 U.S......
-
Bailey v. West, No. 98-7001
...limit and thereby exercise jurisdiction over a late-filed notice of appeal--we have jurisdiction over this matter. See Mayer v. Brown, 37 F.3d 618, 619 (Fed.Cir.1994) (Federal Circuit reviews Court of Veterans Appeals' interpretation of its jurisdictional statutes). Our review is limited to......
-
Bates v. Nicholson, No. 04-7085.
...provisions." Such legal interpretations are reviewed without deference. Jones v. Brown, 41 F.3d 634, 637 (Fed.Cir.1994); Mayer v. Brown, 37 F.3d 618, 619 As we confirmed in Cox, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims "has the power to issue writs of mandamus in aid of its jurisdiction und......
-
Garcia v. Wilkie, 2018-1038
...to review the denials of the motions to reconsider and the motion to vacate. Garcia , 29 Vet.App. at 56 (relying on Mayer v. Brown , 37 F.3d 618, 619 (Fed. Cir.1994) (discussing motions to reconsider), and Harms v. Nicholson , 20 Vet.App. 238, 243 (2006) (discussing motions to vacate) ).4 T......
-
Wick, Matter of, No. 94-7017
...a cause under review'.") (quoting Mitchell v. Maurer, 293 U.S. 237, 244, 55 S.Ct. 162, 165, 79 L.Ed. 338 (1934)); see also Mayer v. Brown, 37 F.3d 618, 619 (Fed.Cir.1994) (Federal Circuit reviews Court of Veterans Appeals with respect to its interpretation of jurisdictional statute); 38 U.S......