Sharp v. Shinseki

Full title: PAMELA J. SHARP, Claimant-Appellant, v. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF…

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Date published: Nov 18, 2011

438 F. App'x 902 (Fed. Cir. 2011)

Opinion

2011-7100

11-18-2011

PAMELA J. SHARP, Claimant-Appellant, v. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent-Appellee.

SANDRA E. BOOTH, of Columbus, Ohio, argued for claimant-appellant. MEREDYTH COHEN HAVASY, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. With her on the brief were TONY WEST, Assistant Attorney General, JEANNE E. DAVIDSON, DIRECTOR, MARTIN F. HOCKEY, JR., Assistant Director, and MEREDYTH COHEN HAVASY, Trial Attorney. Of counsel on the brief were MICHAEL J. TIMINSKI, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, and AMAMNDA R. BLACKMON, Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC.

PER CURIAM

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in Case No. 07-2481, Judge Robert N. Davis.

SANDRA E. BOOTH, of Columbus, Ohio, argued for claimant-appellant.

MEREDYTH COHEN HAVASY, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. With her on the brief were TONY

WEST, Assistant Attorney General, JEANNE E. DAVIDSON, DIRECTOR, MARTIN F. HOCKEY, JR., Assistant Director, and MEREDYTH COHEN HAVASY, Trial Attorney. Of counsel on the brief were MICHAEL J. TIMINSKI, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, and AMAMNDA R. BLACKMON, Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC.

Before LOURIE, LINN, and PROST, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.

Pamela J. Sharp ("Sharp") appeals from a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims denying entitlement to attorney fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). See Sharp v. Shinseki, No. 07-2481(E) (Vet. App. Feb. 8, 2011). Sharp's appeal does not present a constitutional issue or a question of law. Rather, her appeal would require this court to review questions of fact and application of law to fact. Under 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2), however, we lack jurisdiction to review such factual determinations. We must therefore dismiss Sharp's appeal.

For the foregoing reasons, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

DISMISSED

COSTS

Each party shall bear its own costs.