Rivera v. Shinseki

Roberto Ortiz (plaintiff) filed a claim for service-connected-disability benefits with the Department of Veterans Affairs (the VA) (defendant) in 1971 for a nervous condition. The VA rejected his claim. In 1979 Ortiz sought to have the claim reopened, on the grounds of new evidence. The VA refused, on the sole grounds that the new evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening. In 1980, Ortiz attempted to appeal the decision to the Board of Veterans Appeals (the board) by sending a letter to the VA requesting an appeal. The VA informed Ortiz that he needed to submit a form he claimed to have already submitted, and the process stalled, without the board’s taking any steps to address the appeal. In 1994, Ortiz again sought to have his claim reopened, and the VA granted him a service connection for bipolar disorder, with an effective date of 1994. Ortiz appealed, claiming that the effective date should be 1979. The board refused that earlier effective date, holding that his 1980 letter had been ineffective to trigger an appeal because it had lacked specificity as to the issue he was appealing. Ortiz appealed, and his appeal came before the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (the veterans court). During this proceeding, Ortiz died, and his widow, Carmen Rivera (plaintiff) was substituted on the claim. The veterans court upheld the board decision, holding that Ortiz’s letter had been insufficient to meet the requirements for filing an appeal. Rivera appealed.