Case: 19-1600 Document: 67 Page: 1 Filed: 07/30/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ MILITARY-VETERANS ADVOCACY, Petitioner v. SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent ______________________ 2019-1600 ______________________ Petition for review pursuant to 38 U.S.C. Section 502. ------------------------------------------------ NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF VETERANS' ADVOCATES, INC., Petitioner PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA, Intervenor v. SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent ______________________ 2019-1680 ______________________ Case: 19-1600 Document: 67 Page: 2 Filed: 07/30/2021 2 MILITARY-VETERANS ADVOCACY v. SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Petition for review pursuant to 38 U.S.C. Section 502. ------------------------------------------------- CARPENTER CHARTERED, Petitioner v. SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent ______________________ 2019-1685 ______________________ Petition for review pursuant to 38 U.S.C. Section 502. ------------------------------------------------- PHILLIP BOYD HAISLEY, NATIONAL VETERANS LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM, Petitioners v. SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent ______________________ 2019-1687 ______________________ Petition for review pursuant to 38 U.S.C. Section 502. ______________________ Case: 19-1600 Document: 67 Page: 3 Filed: 07/30/2021 MILITARY-VETERANS ADVOCACY v. 3 SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Decided: July 30, 2021 ______________________ ROBBIE MANHAS, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Washington, DC, argued for petitioner Military-Veterans Advocacy. Also represented by MELANIE L. BOSTWICK; JOHN B. WELLS, Law Office of John B. Wells, Slidell, LA. MICHAEL BERN, Latham & Watkins LLP, Washington, DC, argued for petitioner National Organization of Veter- ans’ Advocates, Inc. and intervenor Paralyzed Veterans of America. National Organization of Veterans’ Advocates, Inc. also represented by GENEVIEVE PATRICIA HOFFMAN, ROMAN MARTINEZ, BARRETT TENBARGE. LINDA E. BLAUHUT, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Washington, DC, for intervenor Paralyzed Veterans of America. KENNETH M. CARPENTER, Law Offices of Carpenter Chartered, Topeka, KS, argued for petitioner Carpenter Chartered. ALEX SCHULMAN, Paul Hastings LLP, Washington, DC, argued for petitioners Phillip Boyd Haisley, National Vet- erans Legal Services Program. Also represented by STEPHEN BLAKE KINNAIRD; BARTON F. STICHMAN, National Veterans Legal Services Program, Washington, DC. SOSUN BAE, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Divi- sion, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for respondent in 2019-1600, 2019-1687. Also argued by WILLIAM JAMES GRIMALDI in 19-1680, DAVID PEHLKE in 2019-1685. Also represented by ERIC P. BRUSKIN, JEFFREY B. CLARK, MARTIN F. HOCKEY, JR., ROBERT EDWARD KIRSCHMAN, JR.; BRIAN D. GRIFFIN, ANDREW J. STEINBERG, Office of General Counsel, United Case: 19-1600 Document: 67 Page: 4 Filed: 07/30/2021 4 MILITARY-VETERANS ADVOCACY v. SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS States Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC; DAVID J. BARRANS in 2020-1687, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Jus- tice, Washington, DC. ______________________ Before REYNA, CLEVENGER, and CHEN, Circuit Judges. CHEN, Circuit Judge. In 2017, Congress enacted the Veterans Appeals Im- provement and Modernization Act (AMA) to reform the ad- ministrative appeals system of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). See Pub. L. No. 115–55, 131 Stat. 1105 (2017) (codified at scattered sections of 38 U.S.C.). The AMA re- placed the existing VA appeals system, which had shep- herded all denials of veteran disability claims through a one-size-fits-all appeals process. Under the AMA, claim- ants may now choose between three procedural options in response to an unfavorable initial decision: (1) filing a sup- plemental claim based …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals