Citation Nr: 1318398 Decision Date: 06/06/13 Archive Date: 06/11/13 DOCKET NO. 09-41 490 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Phoenix, Arizona THE ISSUE Whether new and material evidence has been received with respect to a claim of entitlement to service connection for ankylosing spondylosis with involvement of the cervical, thoracolumbar spine, and hands. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Paralyzed Veterans of America, Inc. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD W.T. Snyder, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from July 1973 to January 1975. This appeal to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) arose from an August 2008 rating decision by the Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in Phoenix, Arizona, that denied a petition to reopen the claim. The issue of whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for an acquired mental disorder, to include paranoid schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, has been raised by the record, but has not been adjudicated by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). Therefore, the Board does not have jurisdiction over it, and it is referred to the AOJ for appropriate action. The Veteran has a Virtual claims file, a highly secured paperless repository, associated with his appeal. The Board has reviewed the Virtual file, and the documents therein are duplicative of those in the paper claims file. 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 Dr. Kenneth R. Margules, M.D., noted in May 1985 and June 1995 that he had treated the Veteran since 1985. The Board notes RO letters of record in the claims file over the years that asked the Veteran to submit any treatment records that may help his claim, but none were received related to Dr. Margules. Nonetheless, the Board deems it necessary to seek an appropriate release from the Veteran so VA can seek relevant records. Publicly available information, if current, indicates Dr. Margules is still in active practice. There also is a September 1981 private report from an unnamed physician that notes the Veteran was diagnosed with ankylosing spondylosis by VA physicians at the VA hospital, Wood, WI. The Board does not note any documentation that indicates the RO sought any related VA records after receipt of the June 1978 VA orthopedic examination. A search of archived records may reveal relevant records. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AMC/RO will ask the Veteran to provide the appropriate completed release to authorize a records request from Dr. Kenneth R. Margules, M.D., 2026 Lewis Ave; Zion, IL 60099. An address of 890 Garfield Ave; Libertyville, IL 60048, is also of record. After the appropriate release is obtained, the AMC/RO will ask Dr. Margules to provide copies of any records extant related to his treatment of the Veteran for ankylosing spondylosis for the period March 1985 forward. The AMC/RO will document all efforts to obtain the records. 2. The AMC/RO will also inquire of the VAMC, Wood, WI, or its successor facility, to search its records, to include archived records, for any records related to the Veteran for treatment of ankylosing spondylosis for the period August 1978 to 1981. All efforts to obtain these records will be documented in the claims file. 3. After the above is complete, the AMC/RO must review the claims file and ensure that the foregoing development actions, as well as any other development that may be in order, has been conducted and completed in full. 4. After completion of all of the above, the AMC/RO should re-adjudicate the claim on appeal. If the decision remains in any way adverse to the Veteran, he and his representative should be provided with a Supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). The case should thereafter be returned to the Board, if in order. The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome of this case. The Veteran need take no action unless otherwise notified. VA will notify him if further action is required on his part. He has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2012). _________________________________________________ ERIC S. LEBOFF Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. 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) (2012).