NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
2008-7153
JAMES C. DEMOS,
Claimant-Appellant,
v.
ERIC K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs,
Respondent-Appellee.
Sandra E. Booth, Sandra E. Booth, Attorney at Law, of Columbus, Ohio, argued
for claimant-appellant.
Tara K. Hogan, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division,
United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent-
appellee. On the brief were Jeanne E. Davidson, Director, Martin F. Hockey, Jr.,
Assistant Director, and Elizabeth A. Holt, Trial Attorney. Of counsel on the brief were
David J. Barrans, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, and Dana Raffaelli, Attorney,
Office of the General Counsel, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of
Washington, DC.
Appealed from: United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
Judge Mary J. Schoelen
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
2008-7153
JAMES C. DEMOS,
Claimant-Appellant,
v.
ERIC K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs,
Respondent-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in 06-2034, Judge
Mary J. Schoelen.
__________________________
DECIDED: May 11, 2009
__________________________
Before MAYER, LOURIE, and GAJARSA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
James Demos appeals the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims, which affirmed the Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision denying him
service connection for his knee injury. Our jurisdiction over cases from the Veterans
Court is limited to a review of law or constitutional matters. We do not have jurisdiction
to review facts or the application of law to facts. 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2). Whether the
court misinterpreted “defect” in 38 U.S.C. § 1111 (2006) is a question of how the law
was applied to facts. Also, whether the court did not address a lack of evidence of
whether his knee became more disabled through service versus the natural progression
of his pre-service injury, or that the court relied on the conclusion of the Army medical
board requires a reweighing of evidence. Because Demos has presented only claims
that would require this court to consider facts or the application of law to facts, his case
is outside our jurisdiction and we must dismiss.
2008-7153 2