Citation Nr: 0517536 Decision Date: 06/28/05 Archive Date: 07/07/05 DOCKET NO. 03-31 418 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Roanoke, Virginia THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the veteran's death. 2. Entitlement to dependency and indemnity compensation (DIC) under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant and her daughter ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. Shawkey, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from June 1949 to February 1950, October 1950 to August 1951, and from January 1955 to April 1972. He died in July 2002. The appellant is his widow. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2003 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Roanoke, Virginia. The appellant testified at a Board hearing in Washington, D.C., in May 2005. Also in May 2005, the Board granted the appellant's motion to advance the appeal on the docket for good cause shown under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107 (West 2002) and 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2004). The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required on her part. REMAND During the May 2005 Board hearing, the appellant testified that she would be submitting additional evidence in support of her claim. This additional evidence has been received and added to the claims file and consists of a private medical opinion dated in June 2005 from Craig N. Bash, M.D., M.B.A, along with volumes of military medical records beginning in 1972. In written argument in June 2005, the appellant's representative referred to Dr. Bash's medical opinion and the "voluminous amount of evidence submitted by the [appellant]" and stated that they did not wish to waive jurisdiction of this evidence by the RO. Accordingly, this case must be REMANDED to the RO via the AMC so that the newly submitted evidence can be reviewed by the RO in the first instance. See Disabled American Veterans (DAV) v. Secretary of Veterans Affair, 327 F. 3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2003). Based on the foregoing, this matter is hereby REMANDED for the following action: The RO should review the claims file, to include the additional evidence from Craig N. Bash, M.D., M.B.A. dated in June 2005, and the four volumes of military records that the appellant submitted to VA, and determine if the claims for entitlement to service connection for the cause of the veteran's death and for dependency and indemnity compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318 are warranted. The appellant and her representative should be furnished an appropriate supplemental statement of the case and be afforded opportunity to respond before the claims file is returned to the Board for further appellate consideration. The appellant and her representative have the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See The Veterans Benefits Act of 2003, Pub. L. No. 108-183, § 707(a), (b), 117 Stat. 2651 (2003) (to be codified at 38 U.S.C. §§ 5109B, 7112). _________________________________________________ V. L. JORDAN Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2004).