38 C.F.R. § 19.32
Closing of appeal for failure to respond to Statement of the Case
The agency of original jurisdiction may close the appeal without notice to an appellant or his or her representative for failure to respond to a Statement of the Case within the period allowed. However, if a Substantive Appeal is subsequently received within the 1-year appeal period (60-day appeal period for simultaneously contested claims), the appeal will be considered to be reactivated.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1992–2024 · leading case: Freund v. McDonough, 114 F.4th 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2024).
Freund v. McDonough, 114 F.4th 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2024). “However, we do not mean to suggest that an automatic VACOLS closure will “close” an appeal as the term is used in 38 C.F.R. § 19.32 . Case: 23-1387 Document: 50 Page: 5 Filed: 08/20/2024 FREUND v.”
Mason v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 44 (Vet. App. 1995). “§ 7105 (d)(3) (RO “may close the case for failure to respond after receipt of the [SOC], but questions as to timeliness or adequacy of response shall be determined by the [BVA]”); 38 C.F.R. § 19.32 (1994) (RO “may close the appeal without notice to an appellant or his or her…”
Rowell v. Principi, 4 Vet. App. 9 (Vet. App. 1993). “at 4107 (to be codified at 38 C.F.R. § 19.32 ), even if the RO closes the appeal for failure to file with the RO, within the time provided, a 1-9 Appeal responding to the SOC, “if a Substantive Appeal is subsequently received within the 1-year appeal period (60-day appeal period…”
Kuo v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 662 (Vet. App. 1992). “4107 (1992) (to be codified at 38 C.F.R. § 19.32 )) (case may be closed if no response; no mention of statutory requirement of “receipt”).”
German L. Matthews v. R. James Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 202 (Vet. App. 2005). “, failing to follow administrative-appeals procedures set forth in 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.32 and 19.50), he has made no plausible showing that he was prejudiced by any such deficiencies.”
YT v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 195 (Vet. App. 1996). “32 (1995) (agency of original jurisdiction may close the appeal without notice to an appellant or his or her representative for failure to respond to an SOC within the period allowed; if appellant files substantive appeal within the one-year period, appeal will be reactivated).…”
Waddell v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 454 (Vet. App. 1993). “542, 546 (1992) (where claimant did not perfect appeal by timely filing VA Form 1-9 Substantive Appeal, RO decision became final); see also 38 C.F.R. § 19.32 (1992) (agency of original jurisdiction may close appeal without notice to appellant if he does not respond to SOC within…”
Gonzales-Morales v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 556 (Vet. App. 2003). “See 38 C.F.R. § 19.32 (2002). However, if a Substantive Appeal is subsequently received within the one-year appeal period, the appeal will be considered reactivated.”
Mark Freund & Mary S. Mathewson v. Denis McDonough (Vet. App. 2022). “12 38 C.F.R. § 19.32 (2022). 2 Petitioners allege that VA inappropriately closed their legacy appeals—for which they submitted timely Substantive Appeals—without notice, due to VACOLS's automated closure function.”
12-28 067 (Board of Vet. App. 2016). “§ 7105 (d)(3) (West 2014) ("The claimant will be afforded a period of sixty days from the date the statement of the case is mailed to file the formal appeal"); 38 C.F.R. § 19.32 (2015) (agency of original jurisdiction may close the appeal without notice to the appellant or his…”
06-38 935 (Board of Vet. App. 2017). “556, 557 (2003) (holding that the failure to file a timely substantive appeal does not deprive the Board of jurisdiction as long as the RO does not close the appeal on that basis); see also 38 C.F.R. § 19.32 (agency of original jurisdiction may close the appeal without notice to…”
01-06 815 (Board of Vet. App. 2017). “See 38 C.F.R. § 19.32 . However, a determination as to timeliness or adequacy of any response for purposes of appeal is within the province of the Board.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.