No. 23-713

Joshua E. Bufkin v. Douglas A. Collins, Secretary of Veterans Affairs

Lower Court: Federal Circuit
Docketed: 2024-01-03
Status: Judgment Issued
Type: Paid
Amici (9)Relisted (2) Experienced Counsel
Tags: 38-usc-7261 benefit-of-doubt benefit-of-the-doubt-rule claims-process federal-circuit judicial-review statutory-interpretation veterans-benefits veterans-benefits-act-of-2002 veterans-court
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw SocialSecurity Securities JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2024-04-26 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Must the Veterans Court ensure that the benefit-of-the-doubt rule was properly applied during the claims process in order to satisfy 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1)

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED For more than a century, veterans have been entitled to the benefit of the doubt on any close issue relating to their eligibility for service-related benefits. As presently codified, “[w]hen there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary [of Veterans Affairs] shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant.” 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b). In 2002, Congress enacted the Veterans Benefits Act. Among other things, the Act supplemented the responsibilities of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (the “Veterans Court”) by requiring it to “take due account of the Secretary’s application of section 5107(b)” as part of its review of benefits appeals. 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1). In these cases, the Federal Circuit held that § 7261(b)(1) “does not require the Veterans Court to conduct any review of the benefit of the doubt issue beyond the clear error review” of underlying factual findings—something already required by the pre2002 review statute, under 38 U.S.C. § 7261(a). Pet. App. 16a-17a (quoting Pet. App. 8a-11a). The question presented is: Must the Veterans Court ensure that the rule was properly applied during the claims process in order to satisfy 38 U.S.C. § 7261(b)(1), which directs the Veterans Court to “take due account” of VA’s application of that rule?

Docket Entries

2025-04-07
Judgment Issued.
2025-03-05
Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Thomas, J., delivered the <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-713_jifl.pdf'>opinion</a> of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Jackson, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Gorsuch, J., joined.
2024-10-16
Argued. For petitioners: Melanie L. Bostwick, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Sopan Joshi, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
2024-09-19
2024-08-20
Brief of respondent Denis McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs filed. (Distributed)
2024-08-20
Brief for the Respondent of Denis McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs submitted.
2024-08-09
Record received from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The record is electronic and is available on PACER.
2024-08-08
Record received electronically from the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and available with the Clerk.
2024-08-08
CIRCULATED
2024-07-29
Record requested from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
2024-07-26
SET FOR ARGUMENT on Wednesday, October 16, 2024.
2024-07-09
Brief amici curiae of National Veterans Legal Services Program, et al. filed.
2024-07-09
2024-07-09
2024-07-09
2024-07-09
Amicus brief of Federal Circuit Bar Association submitted.
2024-07-09
Amicus brief of National Veterans Legal Services Program; National Organization of Veterans' Advocates submitted.
2024-07-09
Amicus brief of Disabled American Veterans submitted.
2024-07-09
Amicus brief of Military-Veterans Advocacy submitted.
2024-07-02
Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
2024-07-02
Brief amicus curiae of National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium filed.
2024-07-02
Joint appendix filed.
2024-07-02
2024-07-02
Amicus brief of National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium submitted.
2024-07-02
Joint Appendix submitted.
2024-07-02
Brief of Joshua E. Bufkin, et al. submitted.
2024-05-24
Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 2, 2024. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 20, 2024.
2024-05-22
Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.
2024-04-29
Petition GRANTED.
2024-04-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/26/2024.
2024-04-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/19/2024.
2024-04-01
2024-03-18
Brief of respondent Denis McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs in opposition filed.
2024-02-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including March 18, 2024.
2024-02-27
Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 4, 2024 to March 18, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-02-02
Brief amicus curiae of National Veterans Legal Services Program filed.
2024-02-02
2024-02-02
2024-02-01
Brief amicus curiae of National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium filed.
2024-01-24
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 4, 2024.
2024-01-23
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 2, 2024 to March 4, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-12-29
2023-10-16
Application (23A340) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until December 31, 2023.
2023-10-16
Application (23A339) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until January 2, 2024.
2023-10-12
Application (23A339) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 7, 2023 to January 2, 2024, submitted to the The Chief Justice.
2023-10-12
Application (23A340) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 1, 2023 to December 31, 2023, submitted to The Chief Justice.

Attorneys

Denis McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Respondent
Sarah M. HarrisActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Sarah M. HarrisActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Disabled American Veterans
Amy Frances OdomChisholm Chisholm & Kilpatrick, Amicus
Amy Frances OdomChisholm Chisholm & Kilpatrick, Amicus
Federal Circuit Bar Association
Brian Timothy BurgessGoodwin Procter, LLP, Amicus
Brian Timothy BurgessGoodwin Procter, LLP, Amicus
Joshua E. Bufkin, et al.
Melanie Lynn BostwickOrrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Petitioner
Melanie Lynn BostwickOrrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Petitioner
Military-Veterans Advocacy
Michael E. JoffreSterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox, P.L.L.C., Amicus
Michael E. JoffreSterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox, P.L.L.C., Amicus
National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium
Katie Marie BeckerUniversity of Missouri Veterans Clinic, Amicus
Katie Marie BeckerUniversity of Missouri Veterans Clinic, Amicus
National Veterans Legal Services Program
Liam James MontgomeryWilliams & Connolly, LLP, Amicus
Liam James MontgomeryWilliams & Connolly, LLP, Amicus
National Veterans Legal Services Program; National Organization of Veterans' Advocates
Debmallo Shayon GhoshWilliams & Connolly LLP, Amicus
Debmallo Shayon GhoshWilliams & Connolly LLP, Amicus