Citation Nr: 21010382 Decision Date: 02/24/21 Archive Date: 02/24/21 DOCKET NO. 12-20 971 DATE: February 24, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to revision of the October 1997 administrative decision finding that injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident did not occur in the line of duty is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT In October 2020, the RO issued an AMA rating decision adjudication entitlement to revision of the October 1997 administrative finding. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for dismissal of entitlement to revision of the October 1997 administrative decision have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from June 1989 to April 1996. The Veteran presented sworn testimony at hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in May 2017 and September 2018. The Board notes that the Veteran’s private attorney representative withdrew from this case in January 2021. See January 2021 correspondence. The Disabled American Veterans has a currently valid 21-22 on file and are the representative of record. During a May 2017 hearing, the Veteran challenged an October 1997 administrative decision on the basis of clear and unmistakable error (CUE). In September 2017, the Board referred the Veteran’s CUE claim to the Regional Office (RO) for consideration in the first instance. Subsequently, the RO acknowledged that a CUE claim had been raised at the May 2017 Board hearing and asked the Veteran to submit the claim on VA’s standardized form. The Veteran submitted a formal claim in January 2018, but no action was taken until the RO addressed it in connection with other claims in a July 2018 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC). The Board denied the CUE claim in a February 2019 decision. The Veteran appealed the Board’s decision. The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) issued a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) noting that the Board lacked jurisdiction over the CUE challenge in its February 2019 decision because, despite issuing a SSOC, the RO did not consider the CUE challenge in the first instance in a rating decision.   In October 2020, the Board remanded the case for issuance of a rating decision. The RO issued the rating decision adjudicating the Veteran’s CUE claim in an October 2020 rating decision. The Board notes the Veteran has not yet filed a notice of disagreement (NOD) to this Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) rating decision. Nonetheless, the Board is required to dismiss the legacy appeal because any subsequent appellant adjudications must be done pursuant to the AMA. This legacy appeal is dismissed. STEVEN D. REISS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Department of Veterans Affairs 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.