Jeffery A. Wells v. Anthony J. Principi

18 Vet. App. 33, 2004 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 270, 2004 WL 1053160
United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims·Decided May 11, 2004·No. 03-1014·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinions

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

On November 3, 2003, the appellant, through counsel, filed a motion for an initial decision by the full Court. He argues that full-Court consideration is necessary because the appeal presents the opportunity to consider all aspects of the amendments to the Veterans Benefits Act of 2002, Pub.L. No. 107-330, 116 Stat. 2820 (2002).

Motions for a full-Court decision are not favored. Ordinarily they will not be granted unless such action is necessary to secure or maintain uniformity of the Court’s decisions or to resolve a question of exceptional importance. See U.S. Vet.App. R. 35(c). In this matter, the appellant has not shown that either basis exists to warrant a full-Court decision.

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is

[34]*34ORDERED that the appellant’s motion for an initial decision by the full Court is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Jeffery A. Wells v. Anthony J. Principi, 18 Vet. App. 33, 2004 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 270, 2004 WL 1053160 (Cal. 2004).

18 Vet. App. 33 (Jeffery A. Wells v. Anthony J. Principi) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Barney O. Padgett v. R. James Nicholson
19 Vet. App. 133 (Veterans Claims, 2005)
Edward R. Andrews, Jr. v. Anthony J. Principi
18 Vet. App. 177 (Veterans Claims, 2004)