Rickett v. Dept. Of Veterans Affairs

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. ` United States Court of Appeals for the FederaI Circuit WILLIAM C. RICKETT, C'laimomt-Appellant, - V. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Resp0ndent~Appellee. in 2010-7093 Appea1 from the United States Court of Appea1s for Veterans C1aims in case no. 09-2493. ON MOTION Before RADER, Chief Judge, LoUR1E and O’MALLEY, Cir- wit Ju,dges. RADER, Chtef Judge. 0 R D E R The appellant moves without opposition to vacate the judgment of the United States Court of Appea1s for Veter- ans Claims and to remand for further proceedings Rl CKETT V. DVA 2 The appellant filed a notice of appeal with the Court of Veterans Claims more than 120 days after the Board of Veterans’ Appeals mailed its decision in his case. That court dismissed the appeal as untimely, concluding that the 120-day appeal period established by 38 U.S.C. § 7 266(a) for seeking review of Board of Veterans’ Appeals decisions is jurisdictional and not subject to equitable tolling. The appellant sought this court's review. This court stayed the briefing schedule in this appeal pending the United States Supreme Court’s review of our decision in Henderson v. Shin.seki, 589 F.3d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (en banc) (affirming Court of Appeals for Vet- erans Claims determination that period to appeal to that court is not subject to equitable tolling). In Henderson ex rel. Henderson v. Shinseki, 131 S.Ct. 1197 (2011), the Supreme Court reversed this courts decision and con- cluded that the 120-day deadline for filing an appeal with the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims does not have jurisdictional consequences. Because the Court of Ap- peals for Veterans Claims erred in concluding that the appeal deadline established by § 7266(a) is jurisdictional, we vacate the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims’ judgment and remand for further proceedings Accordingly, IT ls ORDERED THAT: (1) The motion is granted The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings. (2) All sides shall bear their own Costs. 3 1‘1AY 25 2011 Date cc: Deanne Lynn Bonner, Esq. Tara K. Hogan, Esq. s20 RICKETT v. DVA FoR THE CoURT lsi J an Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk Issued As A Mandate: 2 5 F1LED H.S. COURT 0F APPEALS FOR `!'HE FEDERAL C1RCU1T HA¥ 2 5 2011 .IAN HORBALY CLEll(