Citation Nr: 22017076
Decision Date: 03/24/22	Archive Date: 03/24/22

DOCKET NO. 19-22 477
DATE: March 24, 2022

REMANDED

Entitlement to reimbursement or payment for medical expenses incurred from November 18, 2013 to November 29, 2013 at Fairview Hospital/Cleveland Clinic is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from January 1971 to January 1973.  The appellant provided medical services to the Veteran from November 18, 2013 to November 29, 2013.  

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2014 decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Veterans Administration Medical Center (VAMC).

Here, the appellant's VA Form 9 was submitted by an attorney, apparently retained by the appellant.  However, that attorney is not authorized to practice in front of the Board.  In January 2020, the appellant was notified of this and given thirty days to indicate whether they wished to proceed on their own, find a new attorney or representative who was authorized to practice in front of the Board, or have Mr. Venters obtain accreditation.  No response was received in the intervening period.  Thus, the Board concludes that the appellant wishes to proceed without representation.

Entitlement to reimbursement or payment for medical expenses incurred from November 18, 2013 to November 29, 2013 at Fairview Hospital/Cleveland Clinic is remanded.

Here, a Statement of the Case dated in July 2019, indicates the appellant was issued a decision in January 2014 and that a notice of disagreement was submitted in September 2017.  However, neither the decision nor the notice of disagreement has been associated with the file.  The Board notes that appellant's have one year from the date of a decision to submit a notice of disagreement.  Because the decision and the notice of disagreement are not of record, the Board is unable to determine if the appellant filed a timely notice of disagreement.  Prior to the Board determining if adjudication on the merits is appropriate, the AOJ should reconstruct the file and associate the original decision, the notice of disagreement, and any other necessary documentation to the electronic claims file.  

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. Reconstruct the electronic file and associate the original decision letter and notice of disagreement with the file.  

(Continued on the next page)

 

All attempts to locate the records should be documented.  If necessary, the appellant should be asked for any copies of the documents in their possession.  If either document is unable to be associated with the file, a formal finding of unavailability should be made.

2. Readjudicate the claim on appeal.

 

 

MICHAEL E. KILCOYNE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	J. Uller, 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.