Gloria N. Cleaver v. Robert A. McDonald, Secretary of Veterans Affairs

N OTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
GLORIA N. CLEAVER,
Claimant-Appellant
v.
ROBERT A. MCDONALD, SECRETARY OF
VETERANS AFFAIRS
Respondent-Appellee
______________________
2015-7044
______________________
Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims in No. 13-0952, Judge William A. Moor-
man.
______________________
Decided: November 12, 2015
______________________
K ENNETH M. CARPENTER , Law Offices of Carpenter
Chartered, Topeka, KS, argued for claimant-appellant.
Also represented by T HEODORE C. J ARVI, Law Office of
Theodore C. Jarvi, Tempe, AZ.
ROBERT N ORWAY , Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil
Division, United States Department of Justice, Washing-
ton, DC, argued for respondent-appellee. Also represented
by BENJAMIN C. M IZER, ROBERT E. K IRSCHMAN, J R.,

-- 1 of 3 --

CLEAVER V. M CD ONALD 2
MARTIN F. H OCKEY , J R.; D AVID J. BARRANS , MEGHAN D.
ALPHONSO, Office of General Counsel, United States
Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC.
______________________
Before L OURIE, H UGHES , and STOLL , Circuit Judges.
P ER CURIAM .
Gloria N. Cleaver (“Mrs. Cleaver”) appeals from the
final decision of the United States Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims (the “Veterans Court”) affirming the
decision of the Board of Veterans Appeals concluding that
the Department of Veterans Affairs did not err in a July
1973 rating decision by not awarding a service connection
for paranoid schizophrenia suffered by her husband,
James E. Cleaver (“Mr. Cleaver”). Cleaver v. McDonald,
No. 13-0952, 2014 WL 3748615 (Vet. App. July 31, 2014).
Our jurisdiction to review decisions of the Veterans
Court is limited by statute. We may review a Veterans
Court decision with respect to the validity of a decision on
a rule of law or the validity or interpretation of any stat-
ute or regulation that was relied upon by the Veterans
Court in making the decision. 38 U.S.C. § 7292(a). Un-
less a constitutional issue is presented, we have no juris-
diction to review questions of fact or the application of a
law or regulation to a particular set of facts. Id. §
7292(d)(2).
Mrs. Cleaver argues that the Veterans Court applied
the incorrect legal standard when it determined that her
husband did not make a claim for service connection in
July 1973, and further argues that his medical records
raised an implied informal claim for service connection.
The Veterans Court opinion, however, only applied the
relevant law to the facts of the case. In the absence of a
constitutional issue, we do not have jurisdiction to review
the Veterans Court’s application of law to facts. 38 U.S.C.
§ 7292(d)(2); Payne v. McDonald, 587 F. App’x 649, 651

-- 2 of 3 --

CLEAVER V. M CD ONALD 3
(Fed. Cir. 2014); cf. Livingston v. Derwinski, 959 F.2d 224,
225 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (“[T]he mere recitation of a basis for
jurisdiction by party or a court[ ] is not controlling; we
must look to the true nature of the action.”).
Accordingly, we dismiss Mrs. Cleaver’s appeal for lack
of jurisdiction.
DISMISSED
COSTS
No costs.

-- 3 of 3 --