Citation Nr: A25035582
Decision Date: 04/17/25	Archive Date: 04/17/25

DOCKET NO. 230527-349966
DATE: April 17, 2025

ORDER

The appeal is dismissed.

FINDING OF FACT

The May 2023 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) letter informing the Veteran that he had to file his request to review the previously denied claim for service connection for hypertension on the proper form is not a decision and may not be appealed.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

As there is no decision addressing the issue of entitlement to service connection for hypertension that may be appealed in the May 2023 VA RO letter, the appeal is dismissed.  38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.104.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty from January 2010 to May 2013. As will be discussed further herein, this matter was erroneously docketed at the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) as the Veteran attempted to appeal a May 2023 VA RO letter in a Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement) (VA Form 10182) received later the same month.

Specifically, under 38 U.S.C. § 7105, the Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. See e.g., 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. In essence, a "case or controversy" involving a pending adverse determination to which the appellant has taken exception does not exist. Shoen v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 456, 457 (1994).

In the instant case, in March 2016, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) issued a rating decision that, in relevant part, that denied service connection for hypertension. In May 2023, the Veteran filed an Application for Disability Compensation and Related Compensation Benefits (VA Form 21-526EZ) in an attempt to reopen such claim. In this regard, before February 19, 2019, a claimant could file such form to have a claim reopened. However, on February 19, 2019, the AMA went into effect and claimants could no longer file a VA Form 21-526EZ to reopen a claim; rather, a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) must be filed to readjudicate a previously disallowed benefit. 38 C.F.R. § 3.160(e).

Consequently, in a letter sent later in May 2023, the AOJ informed the Veteran that he had to file his request to review the previously denied claim for service connection for hypertension on the proper form. Thereafter, he attempted to appeal such letter by filing a VA Form 10182, and the instant appeal was docketed in June 2023.

However, the Board finds that the May 2023 VA RO letter does not constitute an adjudication of a claim or an otherwise appealable decision pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. Specifically, such letter did not adjudicate the Veteran's claim for service connection for hypertension, but merely notified him of the need to file his claim on the proper form. As there was no adverse action with regard to the AOJ's May 2023 letter, there is no case or controversy for the Board to adjudicate. 

In light of such fact, in January 2025, the Board informed the Veteran that his appeal had been erroneously docketed as no appealable decision had been rendered by the AOJ; rather, the May 2023 letter only instructed him to file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) if he wished to initiate a claim for service connection for hypertension. In February 2025, the Veteran argued that his appeal was valid as service connection for such disorder was warranted. 

However, as previously discussed, the May 2023 VA RO letter informing the Veteran that he had to file his request to review the previously denied claim for service connection for hypertension on the proper form did not adjudicate such claim on the merits. Thus, it is not a decision and may not be appealed. Consequently, the instant appeal was erroneously docketed and must be dismissed.

In this regard, the Veteran and his representative are advised that, if they wish the AOJ to review the previously denied claim for service connection for hypertension, such must be filed on the proper form, which is the Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) form.  

 

A. JAEGER

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	N. Northcutt

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.