Citation Nr: 20021886 Decision Date: 03/27/20 Archive Date: 03/27/20 DOCKET NO. 19-21 345 DATE: March 27, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to a compensable disability rating for bilateral hearing loss is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for left and right knee disabilities is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral macular degeneration is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for left and right lower extremity aortic blood vessel aneurism is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for vertigo is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for congestive heart failure is dismissed. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On January 21, 2020, the Department of Veterans Affairs received notice that the Veteran died on January [REDACTED], 2020. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for dismissal of entitlement to a compensable disability rating for bilateral hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 2. The criteria for dismissal of entitlement to service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 3. The criteria for dismissal of entitlement to service connection for left and right knee disabilities have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 4. The criteria for dismissal of entitlement to service connection for bilateral macular degeneration have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 5. The criteria for dismissal of entitlement to service connection for hypertension have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 6. The criteria for dismissal of entitlement to service connection for left and right lower extremity aortic blood vessel aneurism have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 7. The criteria for dismissal of entitlement to service connection for vertigo have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 8. The criteria for dismissal of entitlement to service connection for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 9. The criteria for dismissal of entitlement to service connection for congestive heart failure have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 1. Entitlement, on a substitution basis, to a disability rating in excess of 0 percent for bilateral hearing loss; and service connection for tinnitus, left and right knee disabilities, bilateral macular degeneration, hypertension, left and right lower extremity aortic blood vessel aneurism, vertigo, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and congestive heart failure. The Veteran had active service in the Coast Guard from July 1943 to April 1946. He died January 1, 2020. These matters originate from October 2018 and January 2019 rating decisions of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) denying entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 0 percent for bilateral hearing loss; and service connection for tinnitus, a bilateral knee disability, bilateral macular degeneration, hypertension, left and right lower extremity aortic blood vessel aneurism, vertigo, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and congestive heart failure. The record, including a July 2019 Form 9 filed by the Veteran as to the aforementioned claims and an August 2018 Form 8 certifying the Veteran’s appeals to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board), reflects that his appealed claims were pending at the time of his death in January 2020. 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). Accordingly, the 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); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1302. In reaching this determination, the Board intimates no opinion as to the merits of the appeal or to any derivative claim brought by a survivor of the Veteran. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1106. The Board’s dismissal of these claim does not affect the right of an eligible person to file a request to be substituted as the appellant for purposes of processing these claims to completion. See 38 U.S.C. § 5121A; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1010, 20.1302; 79 Fed. Reg. 52982-84 (September 5, 2014). In dismissing this appeal, the Board has not overlooked the fact that the Veteran’s wife submitted a VA Form 21-0847 Request for Substitution of Claimant Upon Death of Claimant, which was received by VA on January 21, 2020. Nevertheless, all determinations regarding a request to substitute must be made in the first instance by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ), subject to the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 20.1302. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.1010 (b), (c)(1), (e). A review of the record indicates that the AOJ has yet to issue a decision related to the January 2020 Request for Substitution. Accordingly, prior to any action by the Board on the merits of this appeal, the AOJ must make an initial determination as to whether there is valid substitute for continuing the Veteran’s appeal. If the AOJ grants the request to substitute, the case will assume its original place on the Board’s docket. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.1302 (a), 20.900(a)(2). Eric S. Leboff Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board E. Cody Sametshaw The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.