U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2010

Hunt v. Shinseki

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · Decided June 15, 2010 · No. 2009-7134 · Dyk, Linn, Lourie

383 F. App'x 939

Counsel

Virginia A. Girard-Brady, ABS Legal Advocates, P.A., of Lawrence, KS, argued for claimant-appellant., Sameer Yerawadekar, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. With him on the brief were Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, and Martin F. Hockey, Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief were David J. Barrans, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, and Dana Raffaelli, Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of the General Counsel, of Washington, DC.

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision.

PHH Corp. v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (D.C. Cir. 2018)
Li Cai v. Department of Homeland Security (Merit Systems Protection Board 2024)
Edward Hamel v. Department of Homeland Security (Merit Systems Protection Board 2023)
Rodney Cowan v. Office of Special Counsel (Merit Systems Protection Board 2022)
Dennis Chiappetta v. Dennis Chiappetta, Jr. (Merit Systems Protection Board 2022)
PHH Corporation v. CFPB (D.C. Cir. 2018)
Social Security Administration v. Sridhar Boini (Merit Systems Protection Board 2016)
Charles R. Lane v. Office of Personnel Management (Merit Systems Protection Board 2015)
Department of Health and Human Services v. LeAnn R. Canter (Merit Systems Protection Board 2014)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Hunt appeals from the decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”) affirming the decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (“the Board”) denying entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disability. Hunt v. Shinseki, — Fed.Appx. -, 2009 WL 1904343 (2009). Hunt argues that the Veterans Court erred in its interpretation of 38 U.S.C. § 7104(d)(1) by accepting the reasons and bases set forth by the Board for rejecting certain evidence and by not independently reviewing those reasons for adequacy and justification. In effect, Hunt is asking this court to review factual determinations. Such review is outside the scope of our jurisdiction. 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2). Accordingly, we dismiss.

DISMISSED.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.