Citation Nr: 21026654
Decision Date: 05/03/21	Archive Date: 05/03/21

DOCKET NO. 11-15 201
DATE: May 3, 2021

ORDER

Entitlement to an increased evaluation in excess of 20 percent prior to October 13, 2009 for temporomandibular joint syndrome (TMJ) is dismissed.

Entitlement to a compensable evaluation prior to December 13, 2020 for service-connected chronic headaches is dismissed.

Entitlement to an increased evaluation in excess of 30 percent from December 13, 2020 for service-connected chronic headaches is dismissed.

Entitlement to an effective service connection date earlier than August 12, 2008 for chronic headaches is dismissed.

Entitlement to a total disability evaluation based on individual unemployability (TDIU) prior to October 13, 2009, is dismissed.

FINDING OF FACT

The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims issued a Joint Motion to Terminate the Appeal on January 6, 2021.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

Because the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims has issued a Joint Motion to Terminate the Appeal between the Veteran and the Secretary of VA, the appeal is now moot, and the Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of the claims. 38 U.S.C. § 7264 et. seq. (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.104 (2020).

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty from October 1985 to October 2005.  

The Veteran appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court or CAVC) on August 19, 2019, from the Board's decision of April 26, 2019.

On January 6, 2021, the Court issued a Joint Motion to Terminate the Appeal.  Vet. App. No. 19-5613 (Jan. 6, 2021).  This motion stated that the Veteran, as the appellant, and the Secretary of VA as the appellee, through the General Counsel, reached an agreement to move for termination of the appeal.  38 U.S.C. § 7263(a).

The stipulation agreement as part of this Joint Motion to Terminate the Appeal noted that the Secretary of VA as the appellee agrees to promptly notify the Veterans Benefits Administration with respect to this agreement, and the Veteran, as the appellant, agrees that his pending appeal, U.S. Vet. App. No. 19-5613, shall be terminated with prejudice, as to all the issues addressed in the April 26, 2019 decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals.

The Court has held that when the Secretary of Veterans Affairs enters into such an agreement, the Board decision giving rise to the appeal is overridden, thereby mooting the case or controversy. Bond v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 376 (1992). See also Kimberly-Clark v. Proctor & Gamble, 973 F.2d 911, 914 (Fed. Cir. 1992) ("Generally, settlement of a dispute does render a case moot."); cf. 38 C.F.R. § 14.500(a), (c), (d).

The Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed.  38 U.S.C. § 7105.  Thus, as this appeal is now moot, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration with respect to these matters by the Board.  As the Board does not have jurisdiction to review this claim, it is therefore dismissed.

 

 

MICHAEL A. PAPPAS

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	J. Setter, 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.