⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

Army veteran Eric Eriksmoen appeals the denial of benefits for a lower-back condition. He says he was treated for back spasms in Italy in 1954, and he sought VA benefits decades later, in 2019. The Board denied his claim, and an earlier court remand directed it to reconsider why it disbelieved his account. A remand sends a case back for further proceedings. The Board denied benefits again in March 2024. The Veterans Court found that the Board had not followed its earlier direction, but still affirmed because a separate, unchallenged finding independently defeated the claim. That finding rejected the medical link between his current condition and military service. The court treated the Board's mistake as harmless: an error that did not change the result. Mr. Dojaquez will argue for Eriksmoen that the court overlooked harm to procedural rights, not just whether benefits would immediately be granted. One protection matters here: favorable findings generally bind later VA adjudicators unless clear and unmistakable error is shown, a particularly high threshold for overturning them. The judges also question whether they can hear this appeal at all. In veterans appeals, the Federal Circuit generally reviews legal questions, not factual findings or how the law was applied to particular facts.

Eriksmoen v. Collins (No. 25-1535) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, argued October 5, 2026.