Wayne Ford v. Eric Shinseki

Good Law
471 F. App'x 600
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 6, 201210-17827California336 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Wayne H. Ford appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction his action alleging that the Secretary of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) violated his constitutional rights by failing to pay him interest on an award of retroactive veterans’ disability benefits. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Coyle v. P.T. Garuda Indonesia, 363 F.3d 979 , 984 n. 7 (9th Cir.2004) (subject matter jurisdiction dismissal); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order) ( 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e) dismissal). We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand.

The district court properly dismissed Ford’s action because the Board of Veterans’ Appeals has exclusive jurisdiction over the VA’s decision regarding the provision of veterans’ benefits, even when couched as a constitutional claim. See 38 U.S.C. § 511 (a) (VA decides all issues under any law affecting the provision of benefits to veterans); id. § 7104(a) (Board of Veterans Appeals has exclusive jurisdiction over VA’s benefits decisions); Tietjen v. U.S. Veterans Admin., 884 F.2d 514, 515 (9th Cir.1989) (order) (affirming dismissal for lack of subject…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.