Procopio v. Wilkie
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
913 F.3d 1371 (2019)

- Written by Sarah Hoffman, JD
Facts
The Agent Orange Act, passed in 1991, designated certain diseases for which there was a presumption of service connection for veterans who had served in the Republic of Vietnam. According to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) (defendant) and a general counsel opinion, a veteran who served in another location, including in the waters offshore of the Republic of Vietnam, also qualified so long as the veteran’s service involved at least a visit to the landmass or inland waterways of Vietnam. South Vietnam was formerly named the Republic of Vietnam in 1955 by declaration of its president. Pursuant to the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, which the Unites States entered into in 1958, sovereign nations include both their landmass and their territorial sea. Alfred Procopio, Jr. (plaintiff) served on a ship deployed in the waters offshore of Republic of Vietnam for a year in 1966. In 2006 and 2007, Procopio submitted claims for service-connected disability for diabetes mellitus and prostate cancer, respectively. Both diseases were presumed to have a service connection for veterans who served in the Republic of Vietnam, according the act. Procopio’s claims were denied, and he appealed. On appeal, the government argued that the act had codified two previous regulations—Regulation 311, which had a foot-on-land requirement, and Regulation 313, which did not—which created ambiguity in the act.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Moore, 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.