Citation Nr: 0814699 Decision Date: 05/02/08 Archive Date: 05/12/08 DOCKET NO. 96-05 607 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in No. Little Rock, Arkansas THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for peptic ulcer disease. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Katz, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from October 1952 to August 1954. This case comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a rating decision of the No. Little Rock, Arkansas Regional Office (RO). The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. REMAND This issue was remanded by the Board in June 2007 after being remanded by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) for readjudication by the Board. In it's June 2007 remand, the Board asked the RO to issue the veteran a letter notifying him of the elements of the duty to notify as outlined in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. The RO failed to issue such a notification letter prior to returning the case to the Board. The Board must remand the claim for failing to comply with its previous remand directives. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Additionally, VA treatment records from July 1963 have been obtained and indicate that the veteran was hospitalized for what was initially diagnosed as a gastro-intestinal disease but for which no upper gastro-intestinal disease was found upon examination. At that time, the veteran reported that he had been in excellent health until four months prior to being hospitalized (despite his and other's lay statements asserting hospitalization within a year of separation from service) but also claimed to have had blood in his bowels for the preceding 8 years. An examination is necessary to determine if these complaints are related to the veteran's current disability and if it is therefore at least as likely as not that his current disability was initially incurred in active duty service or was manifested to a compensable degree within the presumptive period (one year) after separation. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Issue the veteran a letter outlining all elements of the duty to notify as outlined in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159, per Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). 2. Schedule the veteran for a VA examination to determine whether he has a peptic ulcer disability that is at least as likely as not (i.e., a probability of at least 50 percent) related to a disease or injury in service, or which was manifested to a compensable degree within one year of separation. A complete rationale for any opinion expressed should be included in the report. 3. Thereafter, readjudicate the claim for service connection for systemic lupus. If it remains denied, issue the veteran a supplemental statement of the case and allow an appropriate period for response. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if otherwise in order. The Board intimates no opinion as to the outcome of this case. The appellant need take no action until so informed. The purpose of this REMAND is to ensure compliance with due process considerations. The purpose of the examination requested in this remand is to obtain information or evidence (or both) which may be dispositive of the appeal. Therefore, the veteran is hereby placed on notice that pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 (2007) failure to cooperate by attending the requested VA examination may result in an adverse determination. See Connolly v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 566, 569 (1991). The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. All claims remanded by the Board or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2007). _________________________________________________ C. TRUEBA Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board is appealable to the CAVC. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2007).