-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Motion to Vacate | Litigation Support | Post-Decisional Motions to Vacate #8547
Comments
See mapping of current state and WIP proposed task flows for Motions for Reconsideration in this Mural. Other Lit Support Motion types in this Mural Some ideas raised:
Other questions:
|
Sketch from a design chat that @sneha-pai and I had. Outlines assumptions, questions, and the beginning of a flow for Motions Attorneys. All of this is reflected in the stories/AC above. Discussion around creating a new motions record for post-decisional motions is in this ticket: #9993 |
I have 2 main questions coming out of this morning's meeting that we will need clarification from lit support on:
A: Motions only apply to Board Decisions |
Notes from Allyce & Marvo conversation with Kate (Lit Support) 04/01/2019What we learned:
Questions for ENG
|
Questions
Does that mean that if a motion for reconsideration (for example) is granted, the decision of that readjudication cannot be appealed? AH ANSWER: This is correct. They can't appeal the motion decision. But, they could always keep filing a motion on the original BVA decision if the motion was denied and if they wanted to.
How do judges know they have more work to do for those appeals in VACOLS? Do they just pop back up in some report they run to see what work they have to do? Answers
Yes.
No. We determine whether a case is AOD based on whether the appellant is 75 or if an AOD motion was submitted for the appellant after the appeal was created.
No, but it could be. We have not yet implemented any CAVC functionality for AMA appeals yet. |
@lowellrex Answer to one of your questions in-line above. |
Recapping the options we have, from my understanding:
Am I missing anything from either of these options @marvokdolor-gov @lowellrex ? |
@allyceh Does 1. involve a bunch of motion tasks? And only CUEs result in a new appeal stream and docket number? And @lowellrex which one is the more sensible engineering approach? |
@marvokdolor-gov That is absolutely correct! |
I think the approach that maps best to the actual process would be to keep everything in the same appeal and only create a new appeal (with a new docket number) for CUEs. I don't know how feasible this is in terms of creating new decisions and EPs though so maybe that doesn't work from an engineering standpoint. I'll defer to @aroltsch on the decision issue/EP creation question. |
I think creating a new appeal will work fine with decision issues and EP creation. An EP is associated with a veteran file number in VBMS. @pkarman might have a better insight into the EP creation. |
AFAIK we don't create EPs for Appeal request issues currently. Or are we using the word "appeal" here more generally to refer any of the 3 flavors of decision review? |
I agree with this! As for decision issues and EP creation, I think we'd need to determine:
|
I am going to move forward assuming we're keeping everything in the same appeal and only creating a new appeal (with a new docket number) for CUEs-- as outlined above. Design will be based on this approach. |
Motion to Vacate StatusAs of 4/1/2020 CompletedOverall Workflow Denied/Dismiss Workflow Granted Workflow |
Training Documentation
|
Current Status: Internal testing for the all workflows developed has started with an end date 3/13/20. Next: Final fixes associated with internal testing, UAT and stakeholder demo. |
Post BVA Feedback SessionSME Demo 4/1/20 and 4/6/20 Feedback Received + New Engineering/Design Tickets RelatedOverall
Granted Flow
Open Questions/Need Prior Development
|
Remaining WorkAs of 4/20/20 Overall
Newly Added
|
Remaining WorkAs of 5/4/20 Overall
|
UpdateRemaining work #14066 placed on hold to solicit feedback via pilot activity. Foxtrot team designer @rutvigupta-design will take next steps pending pilot feedback. |
StatusMotion to Vacate has been released on 6/1/10. Completed
|
I'm going to re-open this for now. There are a couple of open ends and since this is newly being used, we're learning there are a few more requirements to handle. |
Current Status: Phase 3 - In Progress
Background
Lit Support encompasses customer service, correspondence, motions, and receiving and routing CAVC remands at the Board. I call them the department of edge cases, because they often handle complex appeals scenarios.
BVA Litigation Support Responsibilities
Note: We first focused on Congressional Inquiries for Lit Support because the Chairman and LRP prioritized it higher than other Lit Support activities.
Goals
Assumptions
Designs
Phases 1 & 2
Scope
Out of Scope
Requirements/Stories
Phase 1 | Support Baseline Motion to Vacate Task Creation and Functionality
Note: Items in italic without a linked ticket or ticket placeholder do not require development work i.e. the functionality exists for these users in Caseflow today.
Stories
Litigation Support Team Member/Lead
As a Team Lead (Litigation Support), I can add any Caseflow user with CSEM access to the Lit Support team queue ✅
Pulac-Cerullo (OGC/CAVC Liaison) Team
#11683 Motion to Vacate | Designs
#11566 Motion to Vacate | Create a Queue task tree for Lit Support Motion to Vacate decisions
#12283 Motion to Vacate | Create a motion to vacate task from case details
#11252 Motion to Vacate | Allow motions attorneys to assign Motion to Vacate tasks to judges
#10325 Motion to Vacate | Allow judges to log motion to vacate decisions
#11256 Motion to Vacate | Litigation Support | Pulac-Cerullo reminders
#12412 Motion to Vacate | Do not show actions for MTV Judge tasks on_hold
#12691 Motion to Vacate | Fix action permissions for MTV tasks
#13003 Motions to Vacate | Testing Review | Engineering Corrections Required Post-UAT
Phase 2 | Support Motion to Vacate decisions - denied, dismissed
Scope
Stories
Phase 3 | Support Motion to Vacate decisions - granted
Scope
Stories
- This follows the EP 930 pattern.
Straight Vacate and Readjudication
decision, they can go through the typical attorney checkout flow to record their new decision (i.e. new issue dispositions). These new issue dispositions don't overwrite the previous decision, they are in addition to them, and need to be distinguished. (CANCELLED | Motion to Vacate | Decisions attorneys can check out drafted decisions back to their judge #11254)Vacate and De Novo
task, I want to assign the appropriate admin action, so that the first (of two) letters can be drafted and sent to the veteran, and the appropriate steps can be taken in the following scenarios:AC: Attorneys go through the typical attorney checkout flow to record their new decision (i.e. new issue dispositions). These new issue dispositions don't overwrite the previous decision, they are in addition to them, and need to be distinguished.
Straight Vacate and Readjudication
orVacate and De Novo
decisions to judges, they appear in judgesReview cases
queue.Straight Vacate and Readjudication
orVacate and De Novo
decisions. to be dispatched by BVA dispatch. (Motion to Vacate | Judge check out #11255) Need to confirm who does this: Judges or the Drafting Decisions Attorney.Open Technical Questions re: granted motions to vacate
Straight Vacate and Readjudication
andVacate and De Novo
decisions?Motion Types
(LP updated this list 3/17)
In order of priority:
Key contacts and Resources
Epic: Mail
) - See section to the right with complex mail and lit support scenariosOut of scope for this epic
Backlog of additional Lit Support team feature requests
Custom
option in the hold time drop-down.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: