Citation Nr: A21018007 Decision Date: 11/09/21 Archive Date: 11/09/21 DOCKET NO. 190222-5337 DATE: November 9, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for cataracts is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from July 1974 to July 1978. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2018 rating decision. The Veteran filed a VA Form 10182, Notice of Disagreement in February 2019, requesting a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge. The Veteran was afforded a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in May 2021. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the electric claims file. 1. Entitlement to service connection for cataracts is remanded. The Veteran contends that his cataracts are due to exposure to radiation during service. At the Board hearing, the undersigned alerted the Veteran to a procedural defect in his appeal. The Veteran's claim for entitlement to service connection for cataracts was denied in a February 2018 rating decision. The Veteran was sent a letter stating that if he disagreed with the decision he must complete "a Notice of Disagreement, VA Form 21-0958, by February 23, 2019, one year from the date of this notice." On February 19, 2019, the Veteran's Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act of 2017 (VAIMA) went into effect, creating a new administrative appeal system for rating decisions issued on or after that date. Pub. L. 115-55, § 2(x), 131 Stat.1105, 1115 (Aug. 23, 2017). Thus, VAIMA procedures apply only to claims that the RO addressed in a rating decision dated on or after February 19, 2019, while those adjudicated before that date are deemed "legacy" claims. Additionally, VA regulations require that veterans use a different Notice of Disagreement (NOD) form, VA Form 10182, when seeking Board review of decisions issued on or after that date. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.202 (a), (d) (2021). In this case, the Veteran submitted VA Form 10182 on February 19, 2019 to appeal his February 2018 rating decision despite the fact that this rating decision remained under the domain of the legacy system. The RO never issued a Statement of the Case. In May 2019, the Board informed the Veteran by letter that it had received his "Board Appeal request (VA Form 10182)" and placed his appeal on its "Hearing docket." In Hall v. McDonough, 2021 U.S. App. Vet. Claims LEXIS 1838 (October 18, 2021), the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) recently held that the Board has jurisdiction over cases of appeal of a legacy claim with a VA Form 10182. The CAVC stated that 38 U.S.C. § 7105 establishes claim processing rules for legacy cases, providing for initiation of an appeal by a NOD and perfection of the appeal after issuance of a SOC within the appropriate time periods, but does not indicate that Congress intended to limit the Board's jurisdiction based on the specific form used to file the NOD. Therefore, the Board finds that it has jurisdiction to adjudicate this matter. This case remains a legacy appeal. The Veteran submitted a timely notice of disagreement with the February 2018 rating decision, but a statement of the case has not yet been issued. A remand is required for the AOJ to issue a statement of the case. 38 C.F.R. § 20.200 (2018); Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238, 240-41 (1999). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Send the Veteran and his representative a statement of the case that addresses the issue of entitlement to service connection for cataracts. If the Veteran perfects an appeal by submitting a timely VA Form 9, the issue should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration. TANYA SMITH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Alexia E. Palacios-Peters, 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.