Davis v. Dept. Of Veterans Affairs

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential United States Court of Appeals for the FederaI Circuit HAROLD V. DAVIS, Clo:imcmt-Appellant, V. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent-Appellee. 2011-7063 Appeal from the United States Courtof Appeals for Veterans C1aims in case no. 10-1771, Judge Mary J. Schoelen. ON MOTION ORDER Haro1d V. Davis moves for expedited consideration and appointment of counsel This court considers whether this appeal should be dismissed for lack of juris- diction. DAV`lS V. DVA 2 The United States Court of Appea1s for Veterans C1aims vacated and remanded a decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) denying Davis’ claim for enti- tlement to service connection for hepatitis C on December 6, 2010. That court did not consider Davis’ arguments regarding denial of service connection for lymphoma, noting that the lack of a final Board decision regarding that claim rendered it beyond its scope of review. Davis filed a motion for reconsideration on December 22, 2010 with the Court of Appea1s for Veterans Claims and then filed a Notice of Appeal with this court on December 29, 2010. On January 20, 2011, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims issued an order dismissing Davis’ motion for reconsideration because the filing of a Notice of Appeal with this court divested the Court of Appea1s for Veterans Claims of jurisdiction. On February 11, 2011, Davis sent a letter to this court seeking expedited consideration of his case and the appointment of counsel, followed by a subsequent letter received on February 14 reiterating his request. Because the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims remanded Davis’ matter to the Board, its decision appears non-final This court’s jurisdiction over appeals from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims is limited by stat- ute. See 38 U.S.C. § 7292. This court will generally not review remand orders or other non-final decisions from the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. See Williams v. Pr1lncipi, 275 F.3d 1361, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2002). Davis also requests appointment of counsel. HoW- ever, this court has no procedure to appoint counsel for pro se litigants Davis is advised that pro bono counsel may be available to veterans for representation at this court through various assistance programs, including the Federal Circuit Bar Association’s Veterans Pro Bon0 3 DAVIS V. DVA Program. Pro bono counsel may also be available for representation at the Court of Appea1s for Veterans C1aims through the Veterans Consortium Pro Bono Pro- gram. Accordingly, lT lS ORDERED THATZ (1) The parties are directed within 21 days from the date of filing of this order to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed (2) Davis’ motions are denied FoR THE CoURT FEB 25 2011 Date /s/ J an Horbaly J an Horbaly Clerk cc: Harold V. Davis Renee Gerber, Esq. U_s_ c0uR_FBlFEkPPEALs ma THE FEDERAL CIRCUlT 823 FEB 25 2011 lAN HDRBALY CLER{