Citation Nr: 18151340
Decision Date: 11/16/18	Archive Date: 11/16/18

DOCKET NO. 15-23 308A
DATE:	November 16, 2018
ORDER
1. The appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disability is dismissed. 
2. The appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee osteoarthritis and Osgood-Schlatter’s disease, with meniscal strain, is dismissed. 
3. The appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 20 percent for status post left knee tear of the anterior horn of the lateral ligament, with traumatic degenerative arthritis and meniscal strain, is dismissed. 
4. The appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee instability is dismissed. 
5. The appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 10 percent for tenosynovitis of the right hip is dismissed. 
6. The appeal concerning the issue of entitlement to a total rating based on individual employability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is dismissed. 
FINDING OF FACT
While the current appeal was pending at the Board and prior to the issuance of a final decision, the Board received notice that the Veteran died on August [redacted], 2018.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
Due to the death of the Veteran, the Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this appeal at this time. 38 U.S.C. § 7104 (a) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1302 (2017).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION
The Veteran served on active duty from February 1978 to June 1978, from January 1990 to June 1990, and from November 1990 to September 1991. 
These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA or Board) on appeal from February 2012 and May 2015 rating decisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Houston, Texas and Waco, Texas, respectively. Jurisdiction is currently with the RO in Waco, Texas.
The Board also notes that the Veteran’s surviving spouse filed a timely request for substitution that was received by the RO on October 15, 2018. Her request for substitution has not yet been adjudicated by the RO, and therefore the Board does not have jurisdiction over the matter. As such, it is referred to the RO for appropriate action, once this file is returned to the RO. 38 C.F.R. § 19.9 (b).
Dismissal
Unfortunately, the Veteran 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 Veteran and must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See 38 U.S.C. § 7104 (a) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1302 (2017).
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 (2017). 
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 38 U.S.C. § 5121A (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.1010 (b) (2017). A person eligible for substitution includes “a living person who would be eligible to receive accrued benefits due to the claimant under section 5121(a) of this title....” 38 U.S.C. § 5121A (2012); see 38 C.F.R. § 3.1010 (a) (2017). As noted above, a claim for substitution was received in October 2018 and has been referred to the RO for adjudication.  

 
MICHAEL E. KILCOYNE
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	Erin J. Trojanowski, Associate Counsel