Citation Nr: 1320580	
Decision Date: 06/26/13    Archive Date: 07/05/13

DOCKET NO.  11-02 223	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Huntington, West Virginia


THE ISSUES

Whether new and material evidence has been received sufficient to reopen a claim for service connection for hypertension and, if so, entitlement to service connection for such disability. 


REPRESENTATION

Veteran represented by:	Disabled American Veterans


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

C. Fields, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from August 1945 to May 1968.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2010 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Huntington, West Virginia, which denied an application to reopen the previously denied service connection claim for hypertension, among other claims.  The Veteran perfected an appeal from the denial of that claim.

Although the Veteran also perfected an appeal from the denial of entitlement to a total disability rating on the basis of individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU), that claim was subsequently granted in full.  See November 2012 rating decision.  As such, this issue is no longer on appeal. 

Additionally, in June 2013, the Veteran's representative requested that the case be advanced on the docket due to advanced age.  As the evidence of record indicates that the Veteran is over 75 years of age, the motion is hereby granted.  Accordingly, please note this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012).  38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002).

The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC.  VA will notify the Veteran if further action is required.


REMAND

In his January 2011 substantive appeal (VA Form 9), the Veteran requested a Board hearing at the RO (Travel Board hearing).  Additionally, he was notified in April 2013 that he had been scheduled for a Travel Board hearing on July 25, 2013.  

As such, this case must be remanded to the RO to prepare for the Veteran's scheduled Travel Board hearing, or to reschedule the requested hearing, if necessary.  See 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.703, 20.704 (2012).  

As noted above, the motion to advance on the docket is granted herein.  

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

(Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012).  Expedited handling is requested.)

Take appropriate action to hold the scheduled hearing before a Veterans Law Judge at the RO on July 25, 2013, as indicated in the April 2013 notice letter.  

(If necessary, reschedule the Veteran for a hearing at the RO before a Veterans Law Judge.)
 
The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter the Board has remanded.  Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).

This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment.  All claims 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 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2012).



_________________________________________________
Mark D. Hindin
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) (2012).