Sampson v. McDonough
20-2113
| Fed. Cir. | Jul 14, 2021Background
- Francis J. Sampson Jr. served in the U.S. Army (Aug 1967–Jun 1969) and filed a VA claim for service‑connected PTSD on August 31, 2000; that claim did not mention sleep apnea.
- The VA granted service connection for PTSD with an effective date of August 31, 2000; the record did include evidence of sleeping difficulties but no explicit claim for sleep apnea.
- Years later Sampson sought benefits for sleep apnea, alleging it was secondary to his service‑connected PTSD; the VA granted sleep‑apnea benefits effective March 31, 2013.
- Sampson argued the original August 31, 2000 filing should be treated as an informal claim for sleep apnea, entitling him to an earlier effective date.
- The Board of Veterans’ Appeals and the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims held the 2000 submission did not show an intent to claim sleep apnea; Sampson appealed to the Federal Circuit.
- The Federal Circuit considered whether it had jurisdiction under 38 U.S.C. § 7292 and whether the Veterans Court applied the correct legal standard in finding no informal claim; it affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sampson's Aug 31, 2000 PTSD filing constituted an informal claim for sleep apnea | Sampson: the 2000 claim and contemporaneous medical evidence of sleep problems show intent to claim sleep apnea, so effective date should be Aug 31, 2000 | VA/Veterans Court: the 2000 filing expressly sought PTSD benefits and contained no contemporaneous written indication of intent to claim sleep apnea | Veterans Court correctly found no intent to claim sleep apnea; Federal Circuit affirmed |
| Whether the Federal Circuit had jurisdiction to review the Veterans Court's factual conclusions and application of law to the facts | Sampson: challenges the Veterans Court’s determination that no informal claim existed (argues legal error) | Government: much of the appeal challenges factual findings or law-as-applied, which are outside this court's § 7292 jurisdiction | Federal Circuit lacked jurisdiction to reweigh factual determinations or law-as-applied challenges; where legal error was alleged, none was found |
Key Cases Cited
- Sellers v. Wilkie, 965 F.3d 1328 (Fed. Cir. 2020) (sets out essential elements required for formal or informal VA claims)
- Browoski v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 79 (2009) (discusses requirements for an informal claim and indicators of intent to apply for benefits)
- Ellington v. Peake, 541 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (explains Federal Circuit jurisdiction limits under 38 U.S.C. § 7292)