United States Federal Circuit

Any error in a Veterans Claims Assistance Act (VCAA) notice is presumed prejudicial, and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has the burden of rebutting the presumption. Denial of a claim for service connection for choroidoretinitis of claimant's right eye is reversed and remanded where the Veterans Court incorrectly required claimant to establish that an error in a notice the VA was required to give him was prejudicial.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/16/2007
• Published 05/16/2007

Judges

• PROST, Circuit Judge., Before NEWMAN, MAYER, and PROST, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Michael A. Morin, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, L.L.P., of Washington, DC, argued for claimant-appellant.   On the brief was Mark R. Lippman, The Veterans Law Group, of La Jolla, California, for claimant-appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Martin F. Hockey, Jr., Senior Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for respondent-appellee.   With him on the brief was Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General.   Of counsel on the brief were David J. Barrans, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, and Martie S. Adelman, Staff Attorney, United States Department of Veterans Affairs, of Washington, DC. Of counsel was Todd M. Hughes, Assistant Director.