Griffin v. Collins

Case: 25-1450 Document: 32 Page: 1 Filed: 07/28/2026

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

______________________

TERRY GRIFFIN,

Claimant-Appellant v.

DOUGLAS A. COLLINS, SECRETARY OF

VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent-Appellee ______________________

2025-1450 ______________________

Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in No. 24-0567, Judge Joseph L. Toth.

______________________ Decided: July 28, 2026 ______________________

J. BRYAN JONES, III, J B Jones III LLC, Lafayette, LA, argued for claimant-appellant.

SOSUN BAE, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Divi- sion, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. Also represented by ELIZABETH MARIE HOSFORD, PATRICIA M. MCCARTHY, BRETT SHUMATE; BRIAN D. GRIFFIN, DAVID HARMANTAS, Of- fice of General Counsel, United States Department of Vet- erans Affairs, Washington, DC.

2 GRIFFIN v. COLLINS

______________________

Before CHEN, CUNNINGHAM, and STARK, Circuit Judges. CHEN, Circuit Judge.

Mr. Griffin, a veteran of the U.S. Army, appeals a deci- sion from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Veterans Court) affirming a Board of Veterans’ Ap- peals (Board) denial of a motion to revise a 1986 Board De- cision denying service-connected disability compensation. Griffin v. McDonough, No. 24-0567, 2024 WL 5220353 (Vet. App. Dec. 26, 2024) (Decision). Because this court lacks ju- risdiction, we must dismiss.

BACKGROUND

In October 1983, Mr. Griffin applied for service-con- nected disability compensation for various ailments, in- cluding back and knee conditions. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) denied Mr. Griffin’s claims. The Board issued a decision (1986 Decision) denying his appeal, finding that both of Mr. Griffin’s back and knee conditions were “congenital defects.” Id. at *1.

In 2021, Mr. Griffin filed a motion to revise the 1986 Decision based on clear and unmistakable error (CUE). Id. at *2. Mr. Griffin argued that the 1986 Decision was erro- neous in light of O’Bryan v. McDonald, 771 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2014), because the Board failed to acknowledge that a disability capable of getting worse is not a “congenital de- fect” for VA purposes. Decision, 2024 WL 5220353, at *2.

The Board found that there was no CUE in the 1986 Decision. Id. The Board stated that O’Bryan does not ap- ply retroactively in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in George v. McDonough, 596 U.S. 740 (2022). Decision, 2024 WL 5220353, at *2. Further, the Board found that regard- less of whether O’Bryan applied, the 1986 Decision “did not undebatably err in finding that the conditions were congen- ital.” Id. GRIFFIN v. COLLINS 3

The Veterans Court affirmed. Id. at *3. The Veterans Court found that it need not reach the applicability of O’Bryan, because the interpretation of “congenital defect” adopted in O’Bryan already existed at the time of the 1986 Decision through a VA General Counsel precedential opin- ion issued in 1985. Id. at *2. But aside from whether O’Bryan could apply retroactively, the Veterans Court con- cluded that Mr. Griffin’s challenge to the 1986 Decision was, at bottom, “a mere disagreement with the Board’s weighing of the evidence, and such a disagreement cannot amount to CUE.” Id. at *3.

DISCUSSION

“This [C]ourt’s jurisdiction to review decisions by the Veterans Court is limited.” Wanless v. Shinseki, 618 F.3d 1333, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2010). Absent a constitutional issue, this court may not review the Veterans Court’s factual find- ings or its application of law to facts. Singleton v. Shinseki, 659 F.3d 1332, 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (citations omitted).

Mr. Griffin contends that this court has jurisdiction to hear this case, because he presents a challenge to the Vet- erans Court decision that “may have rested on an incorrect rule of law.” Appellant Br. 3–4. For the alleged legal error, he cites to the Board’s holding that O’Bryan did not apply retroactively. Id. at 4–5.

While the Board discussed the impact of George on O’Bryan’s retroactive effect, the Veterans Court did not base its affirmance on this analysis by the Board. The Vet- erans Court determined it “need not go so far.” Decision, 2024 WL 5220353, at *2. Specifically, because the 1985 VA General Counsel opinion provided the same definition of “congenital defect” as O’Bryan, the VA was already obli- gated, at the time of the 1986 Decision, to apply the same rule set forth in O’Bryan as to the distinction between a non-compensable congenital defect (a “condition not con- 4 GRIFFIN v. COLLINS sidered capable of improving or deteriorating”) and a com- pensable disease (a “condition considered capable of im- proving or deteriorating”). J.A. 88 (citations omitted).

Ultimately, the Veterans Court affirmed the Board as to the Board’s “second point:” Mr. Griffin could not estab- lish CUE in the 1986 Decision in light of the “physician’s opinion that the back and knee conditions were congenital in nature.” Id. at *3. On this score, Mr. Griffin’s appeal does no more than disagree with the Board’s weighing of the evidence on a medical question. We cannot address this argument, as it is beyond this court’s jurisdiction. Prinkey v. Shinseki, 735 F.3d 1375, 1383 (Fed. Cir. 2013) “([T]he sufficiency of a medical opinion is a matter beyond our ju- risdictional reach, because the underlying question is one of fact.”).

We have reviewed the remainder of Mr. Griffin’s argu- ments and find them unpersuasive. Because we lack juris- diction over Mr. Griffin’s claims, we must dismiss.

DISMISSED COSTS

No costs.