holding that Secretary’s position at the administrative level in promulgating and applying a regulation was substantially justified
How later courts described this case
- holding that Secretary’s position at the administrative level in promulgating and applying a regulation was substantially justified
- noting the “ambiguity of the disability ratings regulations” relating to extraschedular and TDIU considerations and the “need to streamline and clarify” these regulations
- "As to VA's application of the revised regulation in the instant case, the Court cannot find that the Secretary's position at the administrative level was not substantially justified because 'the Board clearly relied upon then- current law.'" (citation omitted)
- “Because the only litigation position taken by the Secretary before this Court was a timely request for remand, the Court holds that the Secretary acted reasonably and was substantially justified at the litigation stage_”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
IVERS, Judge,
concurring in part:
I concur in the Court’s holding that the appellant fails to meet the legal requirements for prevailing party status for the purposes of awarding EAJA fees.