Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Joe A. Lynch v. Denis R. McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 2020-2067 · judgment December 17, 2021
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
To underscore the uniquely pro-claimant Veterans Administration (“VA”) benefits system, Congress designed the most favorable standard of proof by far in American jurisprudence, the benefit-of-the-doubt rule. This rule ensures that claimants will prevail on any issue of their disability claim(s) when there is “an approximate balance of the positive and negative evidence.” 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) (1988) (italics added). By inserting the modifier approximate into Section 5107(b), Congress set the standard of positive to negative evidence for granting claims lower than an even balance, and conversely, fixed the quantum of negative evidence for denying them higher than the preponderance-ofthe-evidence standard. Nonetheless, over twenty years ago in Ortiz v. Principi, 274 F.3d 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2001), the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals adopted the preponderanceof-the-evidence standard for denying claims. Id. at 1365. In the present case, the en banc court affirmed this standard under a different name. The question presented is: Are the many millions of disabled veterans, their survivors and dependents entitled to have the VA meet a higher threshold of proof to deny their claims than the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Mark Ryan Lippman
Veterans Law Group
For respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar
Solicitor General
Proceedings
- Oct 31 2022Petition DENIED.
- Oct 05 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/28/2022.
- Sep 28 2022Reply of petitioner Joe Lynch filed.
- Sep 15 2022Brief of respondent Denis R. McDonough, Secretary of Veterans Affairs in opposition filed.
- Aug 09 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including September 15, 2022.
- Aug 08 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 18, 2022 to September 15, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
- Jul 11 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including August 18, 2022.
- Jul 08 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 18, 2022 to August 18, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
- Jun 16 2022Brief amicus curiae of National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium filed.
- Jun 16 2022Brief amicus curiae of Military-Veterans Advocacy Inc. filed.
- Jun 16 2022Amicus brief of National Law School Veterans Clinic Consortium not accepted for filing. (June 21, 2022 -- duplicate submission)
- Jun 16 2022Brief amicus curiae of Texas A&M University School of Law Family and Veterans Advocacy Clinic filed.
- Jun 15 2022Brief amici curiae of Swords to Plowshares and Connecticut Veterans Legal Center filed.
- Jun 15 2022Brief amicus curiae of Federal Circuit Bar Association filed.
- Jun 13 2022Brief amicus curiae of Vietnam Veterans of America filed.
- May 31 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 18, 2022.
- May 27 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 16, 2022 to July 18, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
- May 19 2022Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, McDonough, Denis
- May 18 2022Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Joe Lynch
- May 13 2022Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 16, 2022)
- Mar 04 2022Application (21A467) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until May 16, 2022.
- Mar 01 2022Application (21A467) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from March 17, 2022 to May 16, 2022, submitted to The Chief Justice.