With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". to 38 U.S.C. § 7104(d)(1), for the Court to infer such a conclusion. This is so because the BVA noted several falsities and inconsistencies in the appellant’s evidence and assertions. The BVA essentially gave no credence to the appellant’s evidence and assertions that she deemed her marriage to Uldarico Paramo to be null and void at any time. The Court finds no reason to set aside these factual conclusions of the BVA. Finally, the Court notes that while the BVA concluded that the appellant’s claim was well grounded and “gratuitously treated [the] appellant as if she had the status of a claimant, it need not have accorded her the benefits and protections of title 38 as she never legitimately attained the status of a claimant.” Aguilar, 2 Vet.App. at 23; see also Sandoval 7 Vet.App. at 9 (<HOLDING>). III. CONCLUSION The Court holds that there is

A: holding that the state courts rejection of the petitioners ineffective assistance of counsel claim was an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence before the state court
B: holding the defendants claim that he was denied the right to testify was appropriate for direct review when the record was adequately developed to permit full consideration of the defendants claim the pertinent facts were undisputed a pcr hearing was not necessary to resolve a factual dispute and would not aid in the application of the law and the defendants claim was presented not as an ineffective assistance of counsel claim but rather as an error committed by the trial court in excluding the defendants testimony which was not an appropriate basis for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim
C: holding that the issue is not whether a plaintiff will ultimately prevail but whether the claimant is entitled to offer evidence to support the claims
D: recognizing that only a claimant is entitled to the secretarys assistance in the development of the facts pertinent to the claim the benefit of the doubt and the determination whether the claim is well grounded
D.