Citation Nr: 20052582 Decision Date: 08/07/20 Archive Date: 08/07/20 DOCKET NO. 16-48 625 DATE: August 7, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for sleep apnea is dismissed. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. In a May 2020 rating decision, service connection for hypertension was granted, resulting in a full grant of the benefit sought on appeal. 2. In a May 2020 rating decision, service connection for sleep apnea was granted, resulting in a full grant of the benefit sought on appeal. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for dismissal of claim of entitlement to service connection for hypertension are met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.22. 2. The criteria for dismissal of claim of entitlement to service connection for sleep apnea are met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.22. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from July 1961 to May 1989. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2015 rating decision. The issues of service connection for peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper and lower extremities; an increased rating for diabetes mellitus, and a TDIU prior to July 19, 2011 will be addressed in a separate Board decision. Dismissal Pursuant to applicable law and regulation, the Board may dismiss any appeal that fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(d)(5); 38 C.F.R. § 19.22. 1. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension. In February 2016, docket number 14-09 302, the Board remanded the issue of entitlement to service connection for hypertension under Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999), and a statement of the case was issued in September 2016, after which the Veteran perfected the appeal of this issue thereby generating the instant appeal stream under docket 16-48 625. In July 2018, the Board remanded this issue, and in a May 2020 rating decision, the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) granted service connection for hypertension, assigning a disability rating of 10 percent effective February 13, 2014. As this represents a full grant of the benefit sought, this issue is no longer before the Board. See Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (noting that a grant of service connection extinguishes appeals before the Board). Furthermore, the Veteran has not expressed disagreement with either the disability evaluation or effective date assigned. See 38 U.S.C. § 7105(c); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.104, 19.52, 20.1103. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal of this issue, and it is dismissed. 2. Entitlement to service connection for sleep apnea. In February 2016, docket number 14-09 302, the Board remanded the issue of entitlement to service connection for sleep apnea under Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999), and a statement of the case was issued in September 2016, after which the Veteran perfected the appeal of this issue thereby generating the instant appeal stream under docket 16-48 625. In July 2018, the Board remanded this issue, and in a May 2020 rating decision, the AOJ granted service connection for sleep apnea, assigning a disability rating of 50 percent effective March 2, 2015. As this represents a full grant of the benefit sought, this issue is no longer before the Board. See Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (noting that a grant of service connection extinguishes appeals before the Board). Furthermore, the Veteran has not expressed disagreement with either the disability evaluation or effective date assigned. See 38 U.S.C. § 7105(c); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.104, 19.52, 20.1103. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal of this issue, and it is dismissed. L. CHU Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Leanne M. Innet, Associate 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.