Kernea v. Shinseki

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that we lack jurisdiction to review whether the appellant raised a clear and unmistakable error claim because it would “require us to review and interpret the contents of her claim”
• concluding that we lack jurisdiction to review the dismissal of a CUE claim for failure to identify a specific error or a rating deci- sion the appellant alleges contains CUE because it would “require us to review and interpret the contents of her claim,” a factual issue

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).