The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
14-7085•John D. Vaughn v. Sloan D. Gibson, Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs
14-7085Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitJul 25, 2014
N OTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
JOHN D. VAUGHN,
Claimant-Appellant,
v.
SLOAN D. GIBSON, ACTING SECRETARY OF
VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Respondent-Appellee.
______________________
2014-7085
______________________
Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims in No. 11-2582, Judge Margaret C.
Bartley.
______________________
Before REYNA, BRYSON, and T ARANTO, Circuit Judges.
P ER CURIAM .
O R D E R
John D. Vaughn responds to this court’s order direct-
ing him to show cause why this appeal should not be
dismissed as untimely. The Acting Secretary of Veterans
Affairs also responds.
On February 20, 2014, the United States Court of Ap-
peals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”) entered
Case: 14-7085 Document: 15 Page: 1 Filed: 07/25/2014
-- 1 of 2 --
VAUGHN v. GIBSON 2
judgment in Vaughn’s case. His notice of appeal was
received on May 13, 2014, 82 days after judgment.
To be timely, a notice of appeal must be received by
the Veterans Court within 60 days of the entry of judg-
ment. 38 U.S.C. § 7292(a); 28 U.S.C. § 2107(b); Fed. R.
App. P. 4(a)(1). Like appeals from district courts, the
statutorily prescribed time for filing appeals from the
Veterans Court to this court is mandatory and jurisdic-
tional. See Wagner v. Shinseki, 733 F.3d 1343, 1348 (Fed.
Cir. 2013); see also Henderson v. Shinseki, 131 S. Ct.
1197, 1204-05 (2011) (indicating jurisdictional restrictions
on the time for taking an appeal under section 7292(a)).
Accordingly, even in circumstances in which it would be
equitable to do so, this court is without authority to waive
the deadline for filing an appeal to this court from the
Veterans Court. See Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214
(2007).
Because Vaughn’s appeal as to the underlying judg-
ment was filed outside of the statutory deadline for taking
an appeal to this court, we must dismiss the appeal.
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
(1) The appeal is dismissed.
(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
F OR THE COURT
/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole
Daniel E. O’Toole
Clerk of Court
s26
Case: 14-7085 Document: 15 Page: 2 Filed: 07/25/2014
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.