Citation Nr: 20072855 Decision Date: 11/12/20 Archive Date: 11/12/20 DOCKET NO. 12-33 832 DATE: November 12, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from November to December 1975. In a February 2018 decision, the Board denied entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder. The Veteran appealed that decision to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In April 2020, the Court issued a Memorandum Decision vacating the Board’s decision and remanding the matter back to the Board for action consistent with the Court’s decision. 1. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is remanded. The Veteran argues that his acquired psychiatric disorder was aggravated by his service. The Court concluded in its decision that the October 2017 medical opinion the Board relied on was insufficient. In its April 2020 Memorandum Decision, the Court stated that “The October 2017 medical examination did not contain adequate supporting rationale. It was therefore inadequate for adjudication purposes, and the Board clearly erred in relying on it to deny service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder... Remand is warranted for the Board to obtain an adequate medical opinion addressing aggravation of the current acquired psychiatric disorder.” With regards to the October 2017 medical opinion, the Court specifically cited the medical opinion’s lack of adequate supporting rationale, concluding that either the examiner’s conclusion lacked explanation or was internally inconsistent. As the Court concluded that the October 2017 VA medical opinion was inadequate for adjudication purposes, and that a new medical opinion addressing aggravation is required, the Board remands this issue to the Regional Office for a new medical opinion. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Return the claims file to an examiner of appropriate expertise to render an opinion regarding the Veteran’s psychiatric disorder. It is up to the discretion of the examiner if a new examination is necessary, or in the alternative, an addendum opinion is sufficient. Based on a review of the record, the examiner should: (a) Provide an opinion as to whether the Veteran’s psychiatric disorder clearly and unmistakably (obviously or manifestly) existed prior to active service. If such a disorder pre-existed service, what was the most probable diagnosis. If the psychiatric disorder clearly and unmistakably existed prior to active service, provide an opinion as to whether such disorder clearly and unmistakably (obviously or manifestly) was not aggravated during the Veteran’s active service, or whether such increase in severity was due to natural progress. (b) Did a psychiatric disorder actually manifest during service. If so, what was the most likely diagnosis. (c) If the psychiatric disorder did not preexist service, provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e. probability of 50 percent or greater) that it is related to any period of active service. A complete rationale for any opinion expressed should be provided in a report. THE EXAMINER IS MADE AWARE THAT THE PRIOR REPORT WAS DETERMINED TO BE INADEQUATE BY THE COURT. 2. Readjudicate the Veteran’s claim. If the benefit sought on appeal is not granted, the Veteran should be provided a Supplemental Statement of the Case and afforded the requisite opportunity to respond before the case is returned to the Board. H. N. SCHWARTZ Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Jonah Nelson, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.