Citation Nr: 18100593
Decision Date: 04/17/18	Archive Date: 04/17/18

DOCKET NO. 16-17 295
DATE:	April 17, 2018
ISSUES DECIDED:	1	ISSUES REMANDED:	0

Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type 2.
ISSUE DECIDED:
Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type 2.  
ORDER
Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type 2, is dismissed.
FINDING OF FACT
Prior to issuing a decision on the merits of the Veteran’s claim on appeal, the Board received notice in January 2018 that the Veteran died in January 2018, during the pendency of the appeal.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
Due to the death of the Veteran, the Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of the claims of entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type 2.  See 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 with the United States Army from April 1957 to October 1957, and again from October 1961 to August 1962.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Togus, Maine, denying service connection for diabetes mellitus type 2.
The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) at a Board videoconference hearing in March 2017.  A motion to advance this matter on the docket was granted at the hearing.  A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the claims file.
The Board has reviewed the electronic records maintained in Caseflow Reader to ensure consideration of the totality of the evidence.
 
1. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type 2.
Unfortunately, the Veteran died during the pendency of the appeal.  As a matter of law, Veterans’ 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, 333-334 (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. § 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 the processing the claim to completion.  Such request must be filed not later than one year after the date of the Veteran’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).  An eligible party seeking substitution in an appeal that has been dismissed by the Board due to the death of the Veteran should file a request for substitution with the VA office from which the claim originated (listed on the first page of this decision).  38 C.F.R. § 3.1010 (b) (2017).

 
 
MICHAEL A. PAPPAS
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	B. P. Keeley, Associate Counsel