Hooper v. Collins — Federal Circuit affirmed dismissal of an appeal from a nonfinal Board remand

Case
Seth Hooper v. Douglas A. Collins, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Judge
Stoll; Stark; Barker
Date Decided
September 14, 2026
Docket No.
26-1406
Topics
Veterans Benefits; Appellate Jurisdiction; Board Remands; Due Process
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Seth Hooper, a veteran who served in the Navy and Army, sought service connection for a dental condition for treatment purposes only. Although the Board of Veterans’ Appeals recognized in 2022 that his claim raised a treatment issue and referred it to the Department of Veterans Affairs, the VA repeatedly addressed compensation instead of treatment.

In September 2025, the Board remanded the treatment claim so that the Veterans Health Administration could adjudicate Hooper’s eligibility for outpatient dental treatment under 38 C.F.R. § 17.161. Hooper appealed only that remand. The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the remand neither granted nor denied relief and therefore was not a Board “decision” reviewable under 38 U.S.C. § 7252(a).

The Court’s Holding

In a nonprecedential per curiam opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed. It held that the Veterans Court lacked jurisdiction because the only Board action Hooper challenged was a remand containing no order granting or denying benefits. Under the governing statutes and Federal Circuit precedent, such a remand is not a reviewable Board decision.

The court rejected Hooper’s argument that the VA’s alleged failure to follow regulatory requirements and prior remand directives made immediate judicial review appropriate. It also rejected his due-process challenge, concluding that the remands continued to revive his claim and did not deprive him of notice or a fair opportunity to be heard. The court additionally denied Hooper’s motion seeking an order to show cause concerning opposing counsel.

Key Takeaways

  • The Veterans Court generally cannot review a Board remand that neither grants nor denies benefits.
  • Alleged agency noncompliance with prior remand instructions does not convert a nonfinal remand into a reviewable Board decision.
  • Repeated remands did not violate due process where the claim remained active and the veteran retained notice and a fair opportunity to be heard.

Why It Matters

The decision reinforces the jurisdictional boundary governing veterans-benefits appeals: a claimant ordinarily must await a Board ruling that grants or denies relief before seeking Veterans Court review. Even substantial delay or frustration with repeated remands does not itself create appellate jurisdiction.

The ruling also indicates that an ongoing remand process does not violate due process merely because it has not yet produced a merits determination, so long as the process preserves the claimant’s opportunity to pursue the claim.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top