Jackson v. Collins

Case: 26-1278 Document: 20 Page: 1 Filed: 02/25/2026

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

______________________

MARK C. JACKSON,

Claimant-Appellant v.

DOUGLAS A. COLLINS, Secretary of Veterans Af- fairs, Respondent-Appellee ______________________

2026-1278 ______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in No. 25-4708, Judge Joseph L. Toth.

______________________ ON MOTION ______________________

Before TARANTO, MAYER, and STARK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.

ORDER

On November 18, 2025, the United States Court of Ap- peals for Veterans Claims issued an order denying Mark C. Jackson’s motion to expedite proceedings and to compel the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to file the Record Before the Agency (“RBA”). The order continued the stay pending Case: 26-1278 Document: 20 Page: 2 Filed: 02/25/2026 2 JACKSON v. COLLINS resolution of a dispute regarding the RBA and provided that Mr. Jackson could file a renewed motion to expedite once the RBA dispute was resolved.1 Mr. Jackson then filed this “interlocutory appeal.” ECF No. 1-2 at 2. He also moves for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

Under 38 U.S.C. § 7292(a), we have jurisdiction over a “decision” of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. Consistent with longstanding traditions of the federal courts system and to help “avoid unnecessary piecemeal appellate review,” our cases have “generally declined to re- view non-final orders of the Veterans Court,” Williams v. Principi, 275 F.3d 1361, 1363–64 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted), which includes the order sought to be appealed. We see no conceivable basis for any exception to that general rule here. For example, one such exception is where the Court of Appeals for Vet- erans Claims certifies an interlocutory appeal, 38 U.S.C. § 7292(b)(1), but no such certification has issued here.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The appeal is dismissed, and all pending motions are denied.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

FOR THE COURT February 25, 2026

Date 1 The Secretary of Veterans Affairs recently filed a status report noting that he believed the dispute resolved.