Opinion
2016-2350
09-08-2017
DOROTHY LAFORTUNE, Claimant-Appellant v. DAVID J. SHULKIN, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent-Appellee
KENNETH M. CARPENTER, Law Offices of Carpenter Chartered, Topeka, KS, argued for claimant-appellant. SARAH CHOI, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. Also represented by JOYCE R. BRANDA, ROBERT E. KIRSCHMAN, JR., ALLISON KIDD-MILLER; Y. KEN LEE, MARTIE ADELMAN, CHRISTINA LYNN GREGG, Office of General Counsel, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in No. 15-1381, Judge Mary J. Schoelen. KENNETH M. CARPENTER, Law Offices of Carpenter Chartered, Topeka, KS, argued for claimant-appellant. SARAH CHOI, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. Also represented by JOYCE R. BRANDA, ROBERT E. KIRSCHMAN, JR., ALLISON KIDD-MILLER; Y. KEN LEE, MARTIE ADELMAN, CHRISTINA LYNN GREGG, Office of General Counsel, Unit- ed States Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC. Before MOORE, CHEN, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.
Our jurisdiction to review decisions by the Veterans Court is limited by statute. Unless an appeal raises a constitutional issue, we lack jurisdiction to review "a challenge to a factual determination" or "a challenge to a law or regulation as applied to the facts of a particular case." 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2). The issues raised on appeal are all limited to the appeal of fact findings as to whether Ms. LaFortune and the veteran entered into a civil/ceremonial or common-law marriage. We see no question of law. Because Ms. LaFortune's appeal only involves factual determinations and the application of law to the facts of the case, Ms. LaFortune's appeal is beyond the scope of our jurisdiction. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
DISSMISSED
COSTS
No costs.