National Organization of Veterans’ Advocates, Inc. v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
981 F.3d 1360 (2020)

- Written by Sarah Hoffman, JD
Facts
The National Organization of Veterans’ Advocates, Inc. (NOVA) (plaintiff) sought review of the Knee Joint Stability Rule (the rule), which was set out in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Adjudication Procedures Manual M21-1 (the VA Manual) and governed veteran’s claims for service-related knee injuries. Under the rule, a severe, moderate, or slight joint instability rating is assigned based on the degree of joint translation. NOVA argued that the rule was too subjective and prone to error and focused too much on a rigid measurement system rather than on the actual functional loss of capacity suffered by the veteran. NOVA further argued that the court had the jurisdiction to review the petition because the rule was of general applicability and, therefore, an interpretive rule subject to review under 38 U.S.C. § 502. Section 502 contained two sections, the contents of which overlapped, namely § 502(a)(1) and § 502(a)(2). The secretary of the VA (the secretary) (defendant) conceded that these two sections could not be read as mutually exclusive. The secretary argued that for a rule to be of general applicability, the rule must be binding on the agency.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dyk, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.