Shoemake v. McDonald
This text of Shoemake v. McDonald (Shoemake v. McDonald) 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
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________
RONALD K. SHOEMAKE, Claimant-Appellant
v.
ROBERT A. MCDONALD, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent-Appellee ______________________
2015-7005 ______________________
Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims in No. 13-196, Judge Coral Wong Pi- etsch. ______________________
Decided: September 14, 2015 ______________________
KENNETH M. CARPENTER, Law Offices of Carpenter Chartered, Topeka, KS, argued for claimant-appellant.
RENEE GERBER, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washing- ton, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. Also represented by ALEXANDER ORLANDO CANIZARES, SCOTT D. AUSTIN, ROBERT E. KIRSCHMAN, JR., BENJAMIN C. MIZER; MARTIE ADELMAN, DAVID J. BARRANS, Office of General Counsel, 2 SHOEMAKE v. MCDONALD
United States Department of Veterans Affairs, Washing- ton, DC. ______________________
Before DYK, TARANTO, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. The case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2). DISMISSED
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Shoemake v. McDonald, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shoemake-v-mcdonald-cafc-2015.