With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". under section 5904(d). See Cox v. West and Scates, both supra. Third, the Court, on its own motion or the motion of either party, may review a fee agreement that a person who represents an appellant before the Court is required to file with the Court at the time that the appeal is filed. See 38 U.S.C. § 7263(c); Fritz v. West, 13 Vet.App. 190, 192 (1999); Carpenter (Angeline) v. West, 12 Vet.App. 52, 53 (1998), appeal dismissed sub nom. Carpenter (Angeline) v. Gober, 228 F.3d 1379 (Fed.Cir.2000); Shaw v. Gober, 10 Vet.App. 498, 502 (1997); U.S. VET. APP. R. 46(d)(2)(B). The language of 38 U.S.C. § 7263(c) presupposes that any review under this section will be limited to fee agreements in appeals that are currently pending before the Court. See Wick Fee Agreement, 40 F.3d at 371 (<HOLDING>); In the Matter of the Fee Agreement of Bates,

A: holding that intermediate appellate courts have jurisdiction to address merits of appeal when amended notice of appeal is filed before briefs are filed
B: holding that an appeal is perfected when the appeal bond is filed
C: holding that section 7263 authorizes this court to review fee agreements when appeal is properly before this court and when fee agreement has been filed with court at time appeal is filed
D: holding that a notice of appeal is timely when filed before final judgment is entered by the district court
C.