Citation Nr: 21004469 Decision Date: 01/27/21 Archive Date: 01/27/21 DOCKET NO. 15-22 179 DATE: January 27, 2021 ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for a skin disorder, claimed as dermatitis and cysts, to include as due to herbicide exposure. 2. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for hypertension (HTN) with chronic kidney disease prior to July 1, 2011, in excess of 30 percent from July 1, 2011, to May 16, 2014, and in excess of 60 percent from May 16, 2014. 3. Entitlement to service connection for peripheral neuropathy (PN) of the right lower extremity. 4. Entitlement to service connection for PN of the right upper extremity. 5. Entitlement to service connection for PN of the left lower extremity. 6. Entitlement to service connection for PN of the left upper extremity. 7. Entitlement to service connection for upper respiratory breathing issues. 8. Entitlement to service connection for tuberculosis (TB). 9. Entitlement to a total rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU). ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a skin disorder, claimed as dermatitis and cysts, to include as due to herbicide exposure is dismissed. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for HTN with chronic kidney disease prior to July 1, 2011, in excess of 30 percent from July 1, 2011, to May 16, 2014, and in excess of 60 percent from May 16, 2014, is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for PN of the right lower extremity is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for PN of the right upper extremity is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for PN of the left lower extremity is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for PN of the left upper extremity is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for upper respiratory breathing issues is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for TB is dismissed. Entitlement to a TDIU is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT In January 2021 the Board was notified that the Veteran died in December 2020. 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) (West 2014); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1302 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1959 to May 1986. This case comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2012 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Montgomery, Alabama. The Veteran testified before the undersigned during a November 2018 videoconference hearing. A copy of the transcript is of record. This appeal has been advanced on the Board’s docket pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7107 (a) (2) (West 2014) and 38 C.F.R. § 20.900 (c) (2017). When this case was previously before the Board in August 2020, it was decided in part and remanded in part for additional evidentiary development. Unfortunately, the Veteran died in December 2020 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) (West 2014); 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 (West 2014); 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 (West 2014); 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 claimant 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 R.M.K., 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.