for a compensation and pension examination for, inter alia, his feet, reviewed in the context of the entire record, reasonably raised a claim for service connection for hallux valgus. In addition, the Board did not discuss whether Mr. Coker’s April 1994 transcribed hearing testimony constituted an informal (indicating appellant must allege and demonstrate prejudice or Court will conclude a procedural error is harmless); Parker v. Brown, 9 Vet.App. 476, 481 (1996) (same). In the absence of specificity as to any particular inadequacy, especially in light of the finding by the Board that adequate notice was provided with citation to specific notice relied upon by the Board to make that finding, Mr. Coker’s argument, which is advanced by counsel, fails. See Mayfield, 19 Vet.App. at 111 (<HOLDING>). Finally, we note that the Secretary suggests
holding that appellant bears burden of establishing jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence holding that the defendant bears the burden of demonstrating that the action should be transferred holding that an appellant bears the burden of demonstrating error on appeal holding that the appellant bears the burden of demonstrating specifically in what respects the particular notice documents are noncompliant in terms of the purposes sought to be achieved by the notice requirements holding that the party asserting notice error has the burden of demonstrating prejudice