Filed: Nov. 04, 2020
Latest Update: Nov. 05, 2020
Case: 20-1844 Document: 26 Page: 1 Filed: 11/04/2020
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
ISHMEAL W. JEMMOTT, JR.,
Claimant-Appellant
v.
ROBERT WILKIE, SECRETARY OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS,
Respondent-Appellee
______________________
2020-1844
______________________
Appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for
Veterans Claims in No. 20-1255, Judge Coral Wong Pi-
etsch.
______________________
Decided: November 4, 2020
______________________
ISHMEAL W. JEMMOTT, JR., Jacksonville, FL, pro se.
NATHANAEL YALE, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil
Division, United States Department of Justice, Washing-
ton, DC, for respondent-appellee. Also represented by
JEFFREY B. CLARK, CLAUDIA BURKE, ROBERT EDWARD
KIRSCHMAN, JR., LOREN MISHA PREHEIM.
______________________
Case: 20-1844 Document: 26 Page: 2 Filed: 11/04/2020
2 JEMMOTT v. WILKIE
Before MOORE, O’MALLEY, and TARANTO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Ishmeal W. Jemmott, Jr., appeals an order of the
United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Vet-
erans Court) denying his petition for a writ of mandamus.
See Jemmott v. Wilkie, No. 20-1255,
2020 WL 1894644 (Vet.
App. Apr. 17, 2020). Because we lack jurisdiction, we dis-
miss.
BACKGROUND
Mr. Jemmott served on active duty in the United States
Army from September to December 1981 and during the
Persian Gulf War from July 1991 to August 1992. In 2008,
Mr. Jemmott filed a claim requesting entitlement to service
connection for sleep apnea. The regional office denied Mr.
Jemmott’s claim in a July 6, 2009, rating decision. In 2010,
Mr. Jemmott filed a Notice of Disagreement with the Board
of Veterans Appeals. Following the Board’s remand to the
regional office in May 2012 and February 2013, and Mr.
Jemmott’s testimony at a travel board hearing in July
2012, the Board denied service connection for sleep apnea
in 2016. Mr. Jemmott appealed to the Veterans Court,
which in 2017 vacated the Board’s 2016 decision and re-
manded for additional development. In early 2019, the
Board remanded Mr. Jemmott’s claims to Decisions Review
Operation Center DC to schedule medical exams. Later
that year, the regional office reaffirmed its claim denial,
and thereafter, the Board again remanded for further de-
velopment. On remand, in 2020, the regional office once
again reaffirmed its denial, and the Board has yet to review
that reaffirmance.
On February 12, 2020, Mr. Jemmott filed a petition for
a writ of mandamus, claiming the VA had unreasonably
delayed issuing a decision on his sleep apnea claims and
asking the Veterans Court to compel the VA to issue a de-
cision. Considering the relevant factors, the Veterans
Case: 20-1844 Document: 26 Page: 3 Filed: 11/04/2020
JEMMOTT v. WILKIE 3
Court denied Mr. Jemmott’s request. Jemmott v. Wilkie,
No. 20-1255,
2020 WL 1894644 (Vet. App. Apr. 17, 2020)
(applying the TRAC factors adopted in Martin v. O'Rourke,
891 F.3d 1338, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2018)).
DISCUSSION
Our jurisdiction over decisions of the Veterans Court is
limited. Under 38 U.S.C. § 7292(a), we may review “the
validity of a decision of the [Veterans] Court on a rule of
law or of any statute or regulation . . . or any interpretation
thereof (other than a determination as to a factual matter)
that was relied on by the [Veterans] Court in making the
decision.” Except with respect to constitutional issues, we
“may not review (A) a challenge to a factual determination,
or (B) a challenge to a law or regulation as applied to the
facts of a particular case.” 38 U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2).
We lack jurisdiction over Mr. Jemmott’s appeal. Con-
trary to Mr. Jemmott’s contentions, the Veterans Court did
not interpret a statute, announce a rule of law, or address
any constitutional issue. See Appellant’s Informal Br. at 1.
Instead, it only applied the well-established TRAC factors
to Mr. Jemmott’s petition. And Mr. Jemmott has not raised
a non-frivolous legal question implicated by the Veterans
Court’s application of those factors. See Beasley v.
Shinseki,
709 F.3d 1154, 1158 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Thus, we
lack jurisdiction over Mr. Jemmott’s arguments. See 38
U.S.C. § 7292(d)(2); Thomas v. Wilkie, 816 F. App’x 450,
453 (Fed. Cir. 2020). To the extent Mr. Jemmott challenges
the denial of his underlying claim for service connection for
sleep apnea, that denial is not before us in this appeal. We
therefore do not reach that issue.
CONCLUSION
Because we lack jurisdiction over Jemmott’s appeal of
the Veterans Court’s denial of his petition for mandamus,
we dismiss.
DISMISSED
Case: 20-1844 Document: 26 Page: 4 Filed: 11/04/2020
4 JEMMOTT v. WILKIE
COSTS
No costs.