Charlie Cook, Claimant-appellant, v. Jesse Brown, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-appellee, 48 F.3d 1234 (Fed. Cir. 1994)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - 48 F.3d 1234 (Fed. Cir. 1994) March 9, 1994

ON MOTION

Before ARCHER, Circuit Judge, COWEN, Senior Circuit Judge, and RADER, Circuit Judge.


ORDER

RADER

The Secretary of Veterans Affairs moves to waive the requirements of Fed. Cir. R. 27(e) and to dismiss Charlie Cook's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Cook has not filed a response.

On December 1, 1992, the Board of Veterans Appeals denied Cook's claim of service connection for a back disorder. On April 12, 1993, Cook appealed to the Court of Veterans Appeals. On July 27, 1993, the Court of Veterans Appeals dismissed Cook's appeal because it was filed beyond the 120-day statutory period. Cook appealed to this Court.

Under 38 U.S.C. § 7292, this court may review only challenges to the validity or interpretation of a statute or regulation, or to the interpretation of a constitutional provision, that the court of Veterans Appeals relied on in its decision. If an appeal to this court from the Court of Veterans Appeals does not challenge the validity or interpretation of a statute or regulation, or the interpretation of a constitutional provision, Sec. 7292(d) requires this court to dismiss the appeal. That section states that this court "may not review (A) a challenge to a factual determination, or (B) a challenge to a law or regulations as applied to the facts of a particular case."

In his informal brief, Cook argues that he mistakenly mailed his notice of appeal to the Board instead of to the Court of Veterans Appeals. Cook states that because his appeal was dismissed, the wrong law was applied to his case. His appeal thus amounts to a request for review of factual determinations and a challenge to the law as applied to the particular facts of his case. As this court has no jurisdiction to conduct such an inquiry, this appeal must be dismissed. See Livingston v. Derwinski, 959 F.2d 224, 225-26 (Fed. Cir. 1992).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The Secretary's motion to waive the requirements of Fed. Cir. R. 27(e) is granted.

(2) The Secretary's motion to dismiss is granted.

(3) Each side shall bear its own costs.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.