Whether the court erred in denying benefits based on a hypothetical-entitlement-theory

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED QUESTION: 1. Whether the court erred in denying benefits based on a theory, called “hypothetical entitlement theory” that has no section or definition under the United States Code Section 38, Veterans Benefits or Code of Federal Regulations Title 38 Pensions, Bonuses, and Veterans’ Relief Chapter 1 Part 3 Adjudication? QUESTION: 2. Whether the court erred in refusing to apply, Henderson v. Shinseki, 562 U.S. 428 (2011) that explains procedural law and substantive law of filing an “initial claim” for service-connected disability(ies)? QUESTION: 3 ——Whether the court erred in applying an administrative agencies interpretation of a federal statute in this case VA’s interpretation of the statute 38 US.C. § 1311(a)(2), that the Court admits is ambiguous? QUESTION: 4. Whether the court erred in applying “the veteran had to file a claim during the veteran’s lifetime” then benefits would have been granted under | | United States Code Section 38 Veterans Benefits for the “enhanced” for dependency | and indemnity benefit, although the veterans death was service-connected and the disability caused the death? | |