Citation Nr: A21019697 Decision Date: 12/10/21 Archive Date: 12/10/21 DOCKET NO. 190325-27290 DATE: December 10, 2021 ORDER The appeal for entitlement to a compensable initial rating for migraine headaches under the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) is dismissed as moot. The appeal for entitlement to service connection for obstructive sleep apnea under the AMA is dismissed as moot. The appeal for entitlement to a compensable initial rating for a right little finger status post fracture under the AMA is dismissed as moot. The appeal for entitlement to a compensable initial rating for a right ring finger status post fracture under the AMA is dismissed as moot. The appeal for entitlement to service connection for a lumbosacral strain under the AMA is dismissed as moot. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran's appeal of the Agency of Original Jurisdiction's (AOJ's) January 2019 rating decision as to entitlement to service connection for obstructive sleep apnea, entitlement to service connection for a lumbar strain, and the proper initial disability ratings for migraine headaches, a right little finger disability, and a right ring finger disability was filed on an improper form. 2. In July 2021, the Veteran filed a proper, but untimely, VA Form 21-0958, Notice of Disagreement to the January 2019 rating decision with a request for extension of the time period for filing the Legacy Notice of Disagreement. 3. In November 2021, the AOJ granted the Veteran's request for an extension of time to file the Legacy Notice of Disagreement, and accepted the Veteran's July 2021 Notice of Disagreement as timely. The AOJ advised the Veteran that it would proceed with adjudication of his appeal under the Legacy System. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for entitlement to a compensable initial rating for migraine headaches under the AMA have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. 2. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for entitlement to service connection for obstructive sleep apnea under the AMA have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. 3. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for entitlement to a compensable initial rating for a right little finger status post fracture under the AMA have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. 4. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for entitlement to a compensable initial rating for a right ring finger status post fracture under the AMA have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. 5. The criteria for dismissal of the claim for entitlement to service connection for a lumbar spine disorder under the AMA have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from June 2007 to September 2018. On August 23, 2017, the President signed into law the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act, also known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA). This law creates a new framework for Veterans dissatisfied with VA's decision on their claim to seek review. The AMA became effective on February 19, 2019. In August 2020, the Board issued a decision dismissing the Veteran's appeal based upon lack of jurisdiction, finding that the VA Form 10182 (Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement)) filed by the Veteran in March 2019 was not a valid appeal to the January 2019 rating decision, as the January 2019 rating decision was issued prior to the effective date of the AMA. The Veteran appealed the Board's decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In March 2021, the Court issued an Order granting a Joint Motion for Remand, vacating the Board's August 2020 decision. The JMR found that the Board failed to provide the Veteran with notice and opportunity to respond to a potential jurisdictional defect. In July 2021, the Board provided a letter to the Veteran advising him that the Board would need to address questions pertaining to its jurisdictional authority to review his appeal under the AMA. The letter explained to the Veteran that because the rating decision on appeal was issued prior to the implementation of the AMA and was not part of the Rapid Appeals Modernization Program (RAMP), his appeal is not eligible for review under the AMA. The Veteran's appeal stems from a January 2019 rating decision which granted service connection for migraine headaches and assigned a noncompensable rating, effective September 9, 2018; granted service connection for a right little finger disorder and assigned a noncompensable rating, effective September 9, 2018; granted service connection for a right ring finger disorder and assigned a noncompensable rating, effective September 9, 2018; denied service connection for a lumbar spine disorder; and denied service connection for obstructive sleep apnea. Notice of the rating decision was provided to the Veteran on February 1, 2019. An AMA appeal comes before the Board in one of three ways: 1) an appeal of a RAMP rating decision; 2) an appeal of a rating decision with a notification letter dated on or after February 19, 2019; or 3) an appeal of a statement of the case (SOC) or supplemental SOC (SSOC) issued on or after February 19, 2019. 38 C.F.R. § 19.2(d) (eff. Feb. 19, 2019); 38 C.F.R. § 3.2400. In this case, the appeal stems from disagreement with a January 2019 rating decision. Notice of the rating decision was provided to the Veteran on February 1, 2019, prior to the implementation of the AMA. There is no evidence in the claims file to suggest that the Veteran opted into the Rapid Appeals Modernization Program (RAMP) prior to the January 2019 rating decision. Further, a statement of the case has not yet been issued in this appeal. In March 2019, the Veteran filed a VA Form 10182 (Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement)) to the January 2019 rating decision. Although the March 2019 VA Form 10182 was timely to appeal the January 2019 rating decision, it was not the proper form for the Veteran to appeal the January 2019 rating decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. As noted in the February 1, 2019 notification letter, the Veteran was required to complete and return a Notice of Disagreement (NOD), VA Form 21-0958, within one year of the January 2019 rating decision to properly appeal any issue decided in the January 2019 rating decision. Because the Veteran filed a VA Form 10182 (AMA Notice of Disagreement) rather than a VA Form 21-0958 (Legacy Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran did file the proper form to appeal the January 2019 rating decision under the Legacy System. Nevertheless, in June 2021, the Veteran filed a proper Notice of Disagreement on VA Form 21-0958 with a request for an extension of time to file the Legacy Notice of Disagreement. In a November 2021 letter, the AOJ granted the Veteran's request for an extension of time to file a Legacy Notice of Disagreement based upon good cause, and notified the Veteran that it would proceed with the adjudication of his appeal under the Legacy System. Accordingly, because the Veteran's appeal is currently pending in the Legacy System, the appeal in the AMA system is dismissed as moot. See 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. This dismissal has no bearing on the pending Legacy appeal. C. CRAWFORD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Katz, 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.