Hunt v. Shinseki
This text of Hunt v. Shinseki (Hunt v. Shinseki) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Case: 12-7039 Document: 33 Page: 1 Filed: 04/04/2013
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit __________________________
ANTHONY G. HUNT, Claimant-Appellant,
v. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent-Appellee. __________________________
2012-7039 __________________________
Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in case no. 09-4707, Judge Lawrence B. Hagel. __________________________
ON MOTION __________________________
ORDER
Anthony G. Hunt moves to supplement his brief with further points and authorities, which he also refers to as a motion for mandamus. Case: 12-7039 Document: 33 Page: 2 Filed: 04/04/2013
HUNT v. SHINSEKI 2
Mr. Hunt’s motion provides additional arguments re- garding the merits of his case. We deem it the best course to treat his motion as a supplement to his brief.
Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
The motion to supplement his brief is granted. A copy of Mr. Hunt’s supplemental brief will be transmitted to the merits panel assigned to hear this case.
FOR THE COURT /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk
s24
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Hunt v. Shinseki, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunt-v-shinseki-cafc-2013.