de novo the Veterans Court’s determination that it lacked jurisdiction). On the merits, we are presented with only one issue: can mental illness ever excuse the failure to timely file a notice of appeal? We join the majority of our sister circuits in concluding that mental illness can justify equitable tolling. In Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 498 U.S. 89, 111 S.Ct. 453, 112 L.Ed.2d 435 (1990), the Supreme Court held that there is a rebuttable presumption that all federal statutes of limitations contain an implied equitable tolling provision. Pursuant to this decision, we held in Bailey v. West, 160 F.3d 1360, 1364 (Fed.Cir.1998) (en banc), that section 7266(a) was subject to equitable tolling because the type of claimant involved and the purpose of the , 579 (D.C.Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). On the other hand, the Third, Fifth and Tenth
holding that the general equitable tolling doctrine is read into every statute of limitations recognizing the validity of the doctrine but holding no equitable tolling on the facts presented holding that the doctrine of equitable tolling can fairly be read to encompass cases where a plaintiff has been unable to timely file because of disability holding that plaintiff bears the burden to timely allege facts supporting equitable tolling holding that equitable tolling of the time to file a notice of appeal is not permitted