noting that Federal Circuit in Norton v. Principi, 376 F.3d 1336, 1338-39 (2004), rejected arguments that procedural violations in prior final decision could render that decision nonfinal, or that RO decision remained unadjudicated because the RO failed to sympathetically read his claim, and noting Mr. Nelson had not argued CUE
How later courts described this case
- noting that Federal Circuit in Norton v. Principi, 376 F.3d 1336, 1338-39 (2004), rejected arguments that procedural violations in prior final decision could render that decision nonfinal, or that RO decision remained unadjudicated because the RO failed to sympathetically read his claim, and noting Mr. Nelson had not argued CUE
- noting that Federal Circuit in Norton v. Principi, 376 F.3d 1336, 1338-39 (2004
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
FARLEY, Judge,
dissenting:
I cannot concur in the majority’s analysis and, for the reasons stated in the March 29, 2004, order, I believe a remand is required. Therefore, I dissent.