Citation Nr: 20045708 Decision Date: 07/09/20 Archive Date: 07/09/20 DOCKET NO. 14-30 868 DATE: July 9, 2020 ORDER The claim for service connection for Barrett's esophagus is dismissed. The claim for service connection for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is dismissed. The claim for service connection for right knee severe patellar tracking is dismissed. The claim for service connection for right knee patellofemoral syndrome is dismissed. The claim for service connection for left knee patellar tracking is dismissed. The claim for service connection for left knee patellofemoral syndrome is dismissed. The claim for service connection for psoriasis is dismissed. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On February 4, 2020, the RO issued a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) for the claims for service connection for Barrett's esophagus, GERD, right knee severe patellar tracking, right knee patellofemoral syndrome, left knee patellar tracking, left knee patellofemoral syndrome, and psoriasis. 2. On March 4, 2020, the Veteran opted all of the claims identified in the February 2020 SSOC into the modernized review system, also known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA), by submitting a VA Form 20-0996 (Request for Higher Level review). CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for service connection for right knee severe patellar tracking have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 2. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for service connection for right knee patellofemoral syndrome have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 3. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for service connection for Barrett's esophagus have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 4. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for service connection for GERD have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 5. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for service connection for left knee patellofemoral syndrome have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 6. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for service connection for left knee patellar tracking have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 7. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for service connection for psoriasis have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran had active military service from January 1980 to January 1983; from February 2005 to September 2005; and from October2005 to September 2006. In November 2017, the Veteran appeared and provided testimony at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned. In December 2018, the Board remanded the claims for additional development. Service Connection 1. The claims for service connection for Barrett's esophagus, GERD, right knee severe patellar tracking, right knee patellofemoral syndrome, left knee patellar tracking, left knee patellofemoral syndrome, and psoriasis, are dismissed. In May 2013, the RO denied these claims. In May 2013, the Veteran filed a timely notice of disagreement as to these claims. In July 2014, a statement of the case was issued. In September 2014, the Veteran perfected her appeal as to all issues when she submitted a timely appeal (VA Form 9). See 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.200, 20.201, 20.202. In December 2018, the Board remanded all of these issues for additional development. On February 4, 2020, the RO issued a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) as to all issues. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.31. On March 4, 2020, within 60 days of the issuance of the SSOC, the Veteran opted all of the claims into the modernized review system, also known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA), by submitting a VA Form 20-0996 (Request for Higher Level review) in which she identified the February 2020 SSOC; therefore, the February 2020 SSOC is the decision on appeal. On March 5, 2020, the RO sent the Veteran a letter indicating they were sending her appeal back to the Board. This was premature, as the RO should have afforded the Veteran 60 days to opt into the AMA. On March 16, 2020, the Board sent the Veteran a letter notifying her that her appeal had been re-docketed. In summary, the Veteran has opted into the AMA, selecting the Higher Level Review lane, and the RO must therefore readjudicate the claims. The appeal must be dismissed in order to honor the Veteran’s Request for Higher Level Review. As the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal on the issues listed above, they are dismissed. MATTHEW W. BLACKWELDER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board T.S.E., Counsel 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.