Smith v. Collins, 130 F.4th 1337

Daniel R. Smith, a military veteran, sought service-connected disability benefits for blindness due to retinitis pigmentosa, a degenerative eye disease.
Smith's medical exams upon entering and leaving service noted poor night and color vision, but his visual acuity remained correctable and largely stable.
The VA initially denied Smith's benefits claim on the grounds that his condition preexisted service and was not aggravated by it, relying on a medical opinion.
Smith appealed through multiple proceedings, with the dispute centering on whether his condition was aggravated during service and if the VA's medical evidence met the legal threshold to rebut the presumption of soundness/aggravation under §§ 1111 and 1153.
The Board of Veterans' Appeals, and later the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Veterans Court), found against Smith, concluding the evidence clearly and unmistakably showed no increase in severity during service.
Smith further appealed to the Federal Circuit, which addressed whether it had jurisdiction to review the challenge.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Dr. Wilson's medical opinion constituted "clear and unmistakable evidence" rebutting service aggravation	The medical opinion didn't use the “clear and unmistakable” standard and thus couldn't meet the legal bar required to rebut the presumption.	The Board and Veterans Court correctly found that Dr. Wilson's opinion satisfied the standard based on its rationale and evidence.	Court lacks jurisdiction to review factual/applications-of-law-to-fact findings by Board/Veterans Court; appeal dismissed.
Whether reliance on an absence of evidence can legally satisfy the “clear and unmistakable” evidence requirement under 38 U.S.C. § 1111	Absence of evidence cannot, as a matter of law, meet the clear and unmistakable evidence standard.	The Board/Veterans Court relied on affirmative, not absent, evidence (comparison of exam results); absence was not the basis.	Jurisdictional bar applies since the Veterans Court did not base its decision on absence of evidence; appeal dismissed.

Kent v. Principi, 389 F.3d 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (interpretation of statutory standards for presumption of soundness and aggravation in veterans' benefits cases)
Wagner v. Principi, 370 F.3d 1089 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (burden and standards for rebutting presumption of soundness in veterans' law)
Belcher v. West, 214 F.3d 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (reviewability of factual determinations on statutory evidentiary thresholds)
Harris v. West, 203 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (limits of appellate jurisdiction under 38 U.S.C. § 7292)