Whether the appeal met the statutory requirements of reasoning and conclusions.
No. The filing lacked the necessary conclusions and substantive grounds challenging the AI decision, and the defect was not cured after a judicial warning.
Under Art. 61 let. b LPGA and Art. 79 al. 1 LPA-VD, an appeal must state the facts, reasons, and conclusions. The judge gave a 14-day non-extendable deadline to remedy the deficiencies and warned that failure would result in withdrawal and inadmissibility. The claimant did not respond.