Background
Michael F. Shelton, who served in the U.S. Army from 1967 to 1969, applied in 2021 for total disability based on individual unemployability, or TDIU. He reported that he had stopped working full-time in September 2018 and identified his highest annual earnings as $47,960 in 2001, while also listing $167,500 as his highest gross earnings per month.
After a Department of Veterans Affairs regional office denied the application, the Board of Veterans’ Appeals likewise denied TDIU. The Board found Shelton’s claim that he stopped working in 2018 less than credible because several VA treatment records indicated that he continued working after that date, including reports that he worked every day at a truck-and-trailer repair shop. The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims affirmed the Board’s decision, and Shelton appealed to the Federal Circuit.
The Court’s Holding
The Federal Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Under 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2), absent a constitutional issue, the court may not review factual determinations or challenges to a law or regulation as applied to the facts of a particular case. The court concluded that much of Shelton’s appeal asked it to reweigh the evidence concerning whether he remained employed.
The court also lacked jurisdiction over Shelton’s argument that the Veterans Court mishandled 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a) by upholding the Board’s reliance on his 2001 income without an adequate explanation of its relevance. The Veterans Court had applied the regulation to Shelton’s facts rather than interpreting the regulation. His related contention that the Board failed to provide adequate reasons or bases under 38 U.S.C. § 7104(d)(1) likewise required review of the application of law to facts and therefore fell outside the Federal Circuit’s jurisdiction.
Key Takeaways
- The Federal Circuit cannot reweigh evidence underlying a Veterans Court decision or review factual determinations absent a constitutional issue.
- A challenge to the sufficiency of the Board’s explanation for relying on particular income evidence concerned application of law to facts, not an independently reviewable interpretation of 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a).
- Reasons-or-bases challenges under 38 U.S.C. § 7104(d)(1) generally fall outside the Federal Circuit’s limited jurisdiction because they require fact-specific review.
Why It Matters
The nonprecedential decision underscores the narrow scope of Federal Circuit review in veterans-benefits cases. Framing a dispute as regulatory error does not create jurisdiction when resolving it would require reassessing evidence or evaluating how the Board and Veterans Court applied settled law to a claimant’s particular circumstances.