Key legal question
Whether the federal appeal complied with the reasoning requirements of Art. 42 LTF
Extracted holding
The appeal did not sufficiently address the cantonal court's reasoning and therefore was not a valid appeal before the Federal Supreme Court.
Extracted reasoning
The claimant's arguments concerned remission of the repayment obligation and hardship, but neither the administration nor the lower court had ruled on remission. As to the restitution decision and benefit reduction, he failed to explain concretely which legal rules were violated by the cantonal judgment.