New court order on my petition today I ain't crazy lol

[Mr cue]

Ok here is the court order today on my petition.

I ain't crazy y'all and my cases will get to move now with just this order.

This isn't even the decision in the petition it's self.

Man wait tell the judge address the Change of her set a side order.

This is big win for me today I can relax now lol.

They got 10 days the court is on it now

Crazy part both of my cavc cases the petition and the cavc remand are been done by the chief judge.

I am so happy today.

Many might not understand what the va try to do to me I have a very big cases.

And if this wasn't address I would have wait years before my cavc remand would have been return to the bva judge.

 

Here is the chief judge order

 

 

 

On July 6, 2021, self-represented veteran filed a petition for extraordinary relief in the nature of a writ of mandamus. Mr.  asserts that a writ of mandamus is necessary to compel VA to take action on his claims remanded by the Court in January 2021. Petition at 1; see  v. McDonough, No. 20-4110, 2021 WL 485865 (Jan. 29, 2021). Among other things, Mr.asserts that VA has improperly bifurcated the remanded claims by assigning a new docket number to his appeal of the evaluation assigned for his psychiatric disorder and that, as a result, the matter is not being treated expeditiously. Petition at 5-6. In a September 13, 2021, supplemental response, the Secretary explained that the claims were initially bifurcated because, due to administrative error, the psychiatric disorder claim was listed in the tracking system as in a different stage of the adjudication process and, therefore, could not be part of the appeal certified to the Board in a May 2021 VA Form 8. Supplemental Response at 5. As for whether the two appeal streams can be merged now that the error has been corrected, the Secretary included a declaration from the Board's Deputy Vice Chairman explaining that "[l]egacy appeal records can only be merged by the Board if they are actively assigned to the Board . . . at the same time." Id., Appendix A at 3. The Secretary's explanations address the question of why Mr. psychiatric disorder claim was—and remains—bifurcated from the others remanded by the Court in January 2021. However, it is unresponsive to Mr.  assertion that, by assigning a 2021 docket number, his appeal of that issue is not being treated expeditiously as it should be under 38 U.S.C. § 7112. Compare id., Appendix B, Exhibit M (showing that Mr. psychiatric disorder appeal is categorized as "Original" and assigned docket number 2100585), with id., Exhibit AA (showing that Mr.  increased SMC appeal is categorized as a "Court Remand" and assigned docket number 1909416). The Secretary asserts that the psychiatric disorder claim "will be considered 

 2 according to its place on the docket," id. at 14, but has not explained what that place is or whether it reflects expeditious treatment based on the Court's January 2021 remand. Furthermore, Mr.  asserts that all of these matters, both the psychiatric claims and the SMC issues, were advanced on the docket when they were first before the Board, but that postremand they are no longer in that status. See Petition at 1. The Secretary asserts that Mr. has been notified how he can request that his appeals again be advanced on the docket, Supplemental Response at 5, but has not explained why, if VA had previously determined that advancement was warranted, the appeals did not remain in that status following the Court's remand. Consequently, the Court requires additional information from the Secretary. See U.S. VET. APP. R. 21(d). Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED that the Secretary, within 10 days after the date of this order, file a supplemental response to the petition, addressing the specific allegations that Mr.  psychiatric disorder appeal is not being handled expeditiously and that none of his appeals have been advanced on the Board's docket. The Secretary should provide any documentation pertinent to the Court's resolution of this matter. DATED: November 4, 2021 BY THE COURT:         

 

[63Charlie]

Good for you, CUE.

Stand your ground.

You ain't wrong.

[Mr cue]

You wouldn't understand how much this took off my mind today 

I feel this is just the preview of things to come on my petition.

The va really mess this one up.

Only thing I don't like is the court is give the va a chance again to get it right again.

I file the petition they responded and still refuse to fix it basically lie to the court.

An now the court has give them the rode map to the error.

I don't like this lol

I am really happy today this was a fight to get this address.

My cases have been sit for over six months. When they were to be return to the judge.

 

They did a real butcher job on my cavc remand.

And I really feel it was done on purpose.

If a veteran was not up on the laws and how a cavc remand is to be handle. They would have been waiting years for this to be addressed.

 

No veteran should be waiting years for a cavc remand.

Now a board remand is a different beast.

The court has already rule a cavc remand is not a do over. 

[Mr cue]

 So i just reading this over again 10 days is no joke it ain't business day with the court.

The va is about to have a problem coming guys the more I look at this and my petition.

I ask for the va affair to be sanction for volating a cavc remand order and change of my docket number.

I think it's about to be more to come down from the court they had this petition with the chief judge for almost two months.

I am venting again and so happy again my head feel so much  better this morning.

This has been a six month battle just to get someone to get them to address there errors.

I had fought the va all the way to the us court of veterans appeal for my smc benfits.

That was not easy to get a set a side order and to get a reversal order

And. Get my case advance at the court. All pro se.

And when it get back to bva they change everything.

An Than the bva tell you to start over the whole appeal process at the end of the line.

Yea I freak out when I couldn't no longer get to the board to try to get this fix..

Ok I am done lol but they got till next Fri to answer the court.

This should be good lol.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mr cue]

Lol I was kick off a veteran site because. I didn't accept there opinion.

I try to tell them the law but was told they are 30 year retired dro. An I have fought dro decision all the way to the court.

Because of there errors

Ok I accepted everbody opinion but to tell veterans they have no chance.

Or that there award is a error because they feel it shouldn't have been granted is crazy.

I understand everbody don't understand my petition or case.

I post so that maybe i give a veteran understand of the docketing and how cavc remand are to be process in the system.

It's really crazy over at that other site.

 

 

 

[JKWilliamsSr]

1 hour ago, Mr cue said:

Lol I was kick off a veteran site because. I didn't accept there opinion.

I try to tell them the law but was told they are 30 year retired dro. An I have fought dro decision all the way to the court.

Because of there errors

Ok I accepted everbody opinion but to tell veterans they have no chance.

Or that there award is a error because they feel it shouldn't have been granted is crazy.

I understand everbody don't understand my petition or case.

I post so that maybe i give a veteran understand of the docketing and how cavc remand are to be process in the system.

It's really crazy over at that other site.

 

 

 

I have left a facebook veteran page because of this very reason.   In all fairness it is a pretty decent page but there are a couple moderators that are know it all's and tend to abuse their power when you don't agree with them or call them out.   I felt it was not worth the energy to deal with all that stupidity. 

[broncovet]

Congratulations!  

   Yes, I was also banned "from that other website" where a 30 year DRO took over and ridiculed anyone that disagreed with "his" interpretation.  I know several others, too, in that same boat.  

    He gives advice "from a Regional Office perspective only".  The trouble with that is that the VARO decisions are wrong about 80 percent of the time.  

    If you check the BVA chairmans report, you will see that only about 10% to 30% of cases are denied.  The rest are either awards, or remands, where the judge found one or more errors.  

    However, still more errors are caught upon SCL, or HLR, and/or the CAVC, or Federal Circuits.  

    This is why I say the VARO decision are wrong 80 percent of the time.  

     Asking this "expert" at the VARO for advice, is like asking the most senior homeless person living under the bridge for investment advice.  Bad idea.