38 C.F.R. § 20.1402

Rule 1402. Inapplicability of other rules

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Motions filed under this subpart are not appeals and, except as otherwise provided, are not subject to the provisions of part 19 of this title or this part 20 which relate to the processing and disposition of appeals.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a))

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 2000–2019 · leading case: Robinson v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Robinson v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2009). “which relate to the processing and disposition of appeals.”); Disabled Am. Veterans v. Gober, 234 F.”

Livesay v. Principi, 15 Vet. App. 165 (Vet. App. 2001). “” 38 C.F.R. § 20.1402 . The Rules also make clear that “the benefit of the doubt rule” does not apply to the Board’s decision on a CUE motion.”

Disabled Am. Vets. v. Gober, 234 F.3d 682 (Fed. Cir. 2000). · cites it 2× “WA filed a petition for review on April 14, 1999, challenging the validity of the rules codified at 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.1402 , 20.1405(e)-(f), and 20.”

180917-362 (Board of Vet. App. 2019). “See 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.1402 , 20.1405. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Veteran may challenge the Board’s March 2015 decision through a motion for revision of the March 2015 Board decision on the basis of CUE (which the Board is already considering) pursuant to 38 C.”

190211-3649 (Board of Vet. App. 2019). “Whether there was clear and unmistakable error (CUE) in a December 2013 regional office rating decision that denied entitlement to service connection for a lumbar back disability, a right knee disability, a left hand disability, and a right hand disability.”

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.