(applying finality and res judicata to agency decisions when the requirements of statutory and legal exceptions are not met); Strott v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 114, 117 (1991) (determining that the rules of issue and claim preclusion can form “a rational basis for a jurisdictional date denying judicial review to some and granting it to others” and that “ ‘issue and claim preclusion’ ... historically called ‘res judicata’ ... means that decisions once made are not subject to reexamination except for compelling reasons”). Traditionally, the principles of finality include two subdoctrines: (1) “Claim preclusion,” which addresses the preclusive effect of a judgment upon the subsequent relitigation of a claim or cause of action, see Bissonnette v. Principi 18 Vet.App. 105, 110-11 (2004) (<HOLDING>); Link v. West, 12 Vet.App. 39, 44 (1998)
holding the relitigation exception was limited to those situations in which the state court has not yet ruled on the merits of the res judicata issue holding that because relitigation of issue was barred by collateral estoppel res judicata determination of finality of judgment dismissed for lack of standing was not relevant holding that res judicata precludes relitigation of issue that was or could have been decided in enforcement order that was not appealed holding that res judicata did not apply where a trial courts order was not a final judgment holding that res judicata prevents relitigation of a claim that was previously the subject of a valid and final decision of this court