Opinion
2013-7022
12-12-2013
MICHAEL P. EDWARDS, Claimant-Appellant, v. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.
KENNETH M. CARPENTER, Carpenter, Chartered, of Topeka, Kansas, argued for claimant-appellant. ELIZABETH M. HOSFORD, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. On the brief were STUART F. DELERY, Acting Assistant Attorney General, JEANNE E. DAVIDSON, Director, and MARTIN F. HOCKEY, JR., Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief were DAVID J. BARRANS, Deputy Assistant General Counsel and MARTIE ADELMAN, Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC. Of counsel was BRIAN D. GRIFFIN, Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in No. 11-1993, Judge Alan G. Lance, Sr.
KENNETH M. CARPENTER, Carpenter, Chartered, of Topeka, Kansas, argued for claimant-appellant.
ELIZABETH M. HOSFORD, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. On the brief were STUART F. DELERY, Acting Assistant Attorney General, JEANNE E. DAVIDSON, Director, and MARTIN F. HOCKEY, JR., Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief were DAVID J. BARRANS, Deputy Assistant General Counsel and MARTIE ADELMAN, Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC. Of counsel was BRIAN D. GRIFFIN, Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC.
Before RADER, Chief Judge, LOURIE, and PROST, Circuit
Judges.
RADER, Chief Judge.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims affirmed the Board of Veterans' Appeals' determination that Michael P. Edwards' October 17, 2007 purported Notice of Disagreement was invalid under pertinent VA regulations. Because Mr. Edwards seeks review of issues of fact and the application of law to fact beyond this court's statutory jurisdiction, 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2), this court dismisses the appeal.