38 C.F.R. § 19.35
Certification of appeals
Following receipt of a timely Substantive Appeal, the agency of original jurisdiction will certify the case to the Board of Veterans' Appeals. The certification is used for administrative purposes and does not serve to either confer or deprive the Board of Veterans' Appeals of jurisdiction over an issue.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2001–2024 · leading case: Martin v. O'Rourke, 891 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2018).
Martin v. O'Rourke, 891 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2018). “See 38 C.F.R. § 19.35 . The certi- fication process appears to take the VA about two and a half hours to complete, on average.”
Vets. for Common Sense v. Eric K. Shinseki, 644 F.3d 845 (9th Cir. 2011). “38 C.F.R. § 19.35 . A veteran who disagrees with the Board’s decision can fur- ther appeal the decision to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”), an independent Article I court created by the Veterans’ Judicial Review Act of November 18, 1988, Pub.”
James I. Evans v. Eric K. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 7 (Vet. App. 2011). “See 38 C.F.R. § 19.35 (2011) (providing that a VA Form 8 "'Certification of Appeal' .”
Wilson v. Mansfield, 506 F.3d 1055 (Fed. Cir. 2007). “38 C.F.R. § 19.35 . Once the appeal is certified, the claimant has ninety days in which to submit additional evidence to the Board; he may also submit it after that period upon a showing of good cause.”
Kyhn v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 228 (Vet. App. 2011). “38 C.F.R. § 19.35 (2010) (providing that after “receipt of a timely Substantive Appeal, the [AOJ] will certify the case to the Board.”
Luke C. Miley, Claimant-Appellant v. Anthony J. Principi, Sec'y of Vets. Affairs, 242 F.3d 1050 (Fed. Cir. 2001). “§ 7105 (d)(3); 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.35 , 19.36. Pursuant to this regulatory regime, the pertinent regional office issued a rating decision denying Mr.”
Vets. for Common Sense v. Peake, 563 F. Supp. 2d 1049 (N.D. Cal. 2008). “38 C.F.R. § 19.35 ; RT 1017:2-12. There are no statutory or regulatory time limits imposed on the VA during any step of the adjudication and appeals process for SCDDC.”
Arnold C. Kyhn v. Eric K. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 335 (Vet. App. 2010). “38 C.F.R. § 19.35 (2009) (providing that after “receipt of a timely Substantive Appeal, the [AOJ] will certify the case to the Board.”
Disabled Am. Vets. v. Sec'y of Vets. Affairs, 327 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2003). “38 C.F.R. §§ 19.35 , 19.36 (2002). A claimant appealing to the Board, that is, an “appellant,” id.”
Vets. for Common Sense v. Shinseki, 663 F.3d 1033 (9th Cir. 2011). “38 C.F.R. § 19.35 . A veteran who disagrees with the Board’s decision can further appeal the decision to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”), an independent Article I court created by the Veterans’ Judicial Review Act of 23 November 18, 1988, Pub.”
Hal H. Williams v. Robert L. Wilkie (Vet. App. 2019). “Compare 38 C.F.R. § 19.35 (2018) ("Following receipt of a timely Substantive Appeal, the [AOJ] will certify the case to the Board[].”
Hal H. Williams v. Robert L. Wilkie (Vet. App. 2019). “Compare 38 C.F.R. § 19.35 (2018) ("Following receipt of a timely Substantive Appeal, the [AOJ] will certify the case to the Board[].”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.