Alexander v. Dept. Of Veterans Affairs ( 2011 )


Menu:
  • NOTE: This order is n0nprecedentia1.
    United States Court of Appeals
    for the FederaI Circuit
    MICHAEL ALEXANDER,
    Claimant-Appellant,
    V.
    ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS
    AFFAIRS, '
    Resp0ndent-Appellee. '
    2010-7035 _
    Appea1 from the United States C0urt of Appea1s for
    Veterans C1aims in case n0. 08-2482, Judge R0nald M.
    HOIdaWay.
    ON MOTION
    Be-fore RA1)ER, Chief Ju,dge, L0UR1E and PROST, Circu£t
    Judges.
    RADER, Chief Judge.
    0 R D E R
    The Secretary of Veterans Affairs and Michae1 A1ex-
    ander move to vacate the judgment of the United States
    ALEX.ANDER V. DVA 2
    Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and to remand for
    further proceedings.
    The appellant filed a notice of appeal with the C0urt
    of Veterans Clairns more than 120 days after the Board of
    Veterans’ Appeals mailed its decision in his case. That
    court dismissed the appeal as untin1ely, concluding that
    the 120-day appeal period established by 
    38 U.S.C. § 7266
    (a) for seeking review of B0ard of Veterans’ Appeals
    decisions is jurisdictional and not subject to equitable
    tolling The appellant sought this court's review.
    This court stayed the briefing schedule in this appeal
    pending the United States Supreme Court’s review of our
    decision in Hen.derson v. Shinsekr,``, 
    589 F.3d 1201
     (Fed.
    Cir. 2009) (en banc) (aff;``irming Court of Appeals for Vet-
    erans Claims determination that period to appeal to that
    court is not subject to equitable tolling). In Henderson ex
    rel. Henderson v. Shinseki, 
    131 S.Ct. 1197
     {2011), the
    Supreme Court reversed this court’s decision and con-
    cluded that the 120-day deadline for filing an appeal with
    the Court of Appea1s for Veterans Claims does not have
    jurisdictional consequences. Because the Court of Ap-
    peals for Veterans Claims erred in concluding that the
    appeal deadline established by § 7266(a) is jurisdictional,
    we vacate the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims’
    judgment and remand for further proceedings
    Accordingly,
    I'1‘ ls 0RDERED THAT:
    (1) The motions are granted The judgment is va-
    cated and the case is remanded for further proceedings
    (2) All sides shall bear their own costs.
    3
    ALEXANDER V. DVA
    FoR THE CoURr
    MA¥ 2 5  /s/ J an Horbal_v
    Date J an Horbaly
    cc: Christopher R. Liro, Esq.
    Shelly D. Weger, Esq.
    s20
    Clerk
    mw 25 2011 1
    Issued As A Mandate: _g______ jj 1
    FlI.ED
    s.s.c0u on
    ma=§B.-‘?§it*a’it%?.F
    HAY 25 2011
    JAmu)aeALv
    cum
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2010-7035

Judges: Rader, Lourie, O'Malley

Filed Date: 5/25/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024