Citation Nr: 1416699	
Decision Date: 04/15/14    Archive Date: 04/24/14

DOCKET NO.  11-19 259	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Cleveland, Ohio


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for multiple myeloma, claimed as due to herbicide exposure.

2.  Entitlement to service connection for a heart disability, claimed as due to herbicide exposure.


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Disabled American Veterans


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Elizabeth Jalley, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from September 1967 to September 1987.

This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2010 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Pension Management Center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

During the course of this appeal, jurisdiction of this claim was transferred to the VA Regional Office (RO) in Cleveland, Ohio.

The Board notes that it has reviewed both the Veteran's physical claims file and the electronic claims files in Virtual VA and the Veterans Benefits Management System (VBMS) to ensure that the complete record is considered.


FINDING OF FACT

In April 2014, the Board received notice that the appellant died in December 2013.


CONCLUSION OF LAW

Due to the death of the appellant, the Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this claim at this time.  38 U.S.C.A. § 7104(a) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1302 (2013); but see Veterans' Benefits Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-389, § 212, 122 Stat. 4145, 4151 (2008).


REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

Unfortunately, the appellant died during the pendency of the appeal.  As a matter of law, appellants' claims do not survive their deaths.  Zevalkink v. Brown, 102 F.3d 1236, 1243-44 (Fed. Cir. 1996); Smith v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 330, 333-34 (1997); Landicho v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 42, 47 (1994).  This appeal on the merits has become moot by virtue of the death of the appellant and must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.  See 38 U.S.C.A. § 7104(a) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1302 (2013).

In reaching this determination, the Board intimates no opinion as to the merits of this appeal or to any derivative claim brought by a survivor of the Veteran.  38 C.F.R. § 20.1106 (2013).

The Board's dismissal of this appeal does not affect the right of an eligible person to file a request to be substituted as the appellant for purposes of processing the claim to completion.  Such request must be filed not later than one year after the date of the appellant's death.  See Veterans' Benefits Improvement Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-389, § 212, 122 Stat. 4145, 4151 (2008) (creating new 38 U.S.C. § 5121A, substitution in case of death of a claimant who dies on or after October 10, 2008).  As provided for in this new provision, a person eligible for substitution will include 'a living person who would be eligible to receive accrued benefits due to the claimant under section 5121(a) of this title ....'  The Secretary will be issuing regulations governing the rules and procedures for substitution upon death.  Until such regulations are issued, an eligible party seeking substitution in an appeal that has been dismissed by the Board due to the death of the claimant should file a request for substitution with the VA regional office (RO) from which the claim originated (listed on the first page of this decision).


ORDER

The appeal is dismissed.



____________________________________________
DEBORAH W. SINGLETON
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals

Department of Veterans Affairs