Citation Nr: 20021750 Decision Date: 03/26/20 Archive Date: 03/26/20 DOCKET NO. 18-55 616 DATE: March 26, 2020 REMANDED The issue of entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death is remanded. The issue of entitlement to Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) benefits under 38 U.S.C. § 1318 is remanded. The issue of entitlement to death pension benefits is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty for training from October 1957 to April 1958. In addition to the matters noted above, the Veteran had a claim pending for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) prior to his death. The Appellant has been properly substituted and the electronic record indicates that the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) is taking action on this issue but has not issued a rating decision on the matter. The AOJ is instructed to continue with any remaining development on the matter and then adjudicated the claim. 1. Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death is remanded. 2. Entitlement to Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) benefits under 38 U.S.C. § 1318 is remanded. 3. Entitlement to death pension benefits is remanded. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR THE RO ADJUDICATOR: The Appellant has presented evidence that the Veteran’s service-connected depressive disorder and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) disabilities may have caused or aggravated the Veteran’s primary cause of death: acute myocardial infarction due to coronary artery disease (CAD). The Board has determined that additional development of the Appellant’s claim for service connection for the Veteran’s cause of death is necessary. The issues of entitlement to DIC benefits under 38 C.F.R. § 1318 and death pension benefits are remanded as inextricably intertwined with the issue of entitlement to service connection for the Veteran’s cause of death. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991); see also Tyrues v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 166, 177 (2009) (en banc) (explaining that claims are inextricably intertwined where the adjudication of one claim could have a significant impact on the adjudication of another claim). 2. Request the Appellant provide any private treatment records she possesses regarding the Veteran’s cardiac condition, to include from the Veteran’s treating cardiologist(s). If the Appellant identified private records, following the securing of the appropriate waivers, make all appropriate attempts to locate such records and to associate them with the claims file. If the Appellant has no further evidence to submit, or, if after exhaustive efforts have been made, no records can be identified, so annotate the record. 3. Obtain any outstanding VA medical records for the Veteran prior to his death and associate them with the claims file. 4. After providing the Appellant with a time period to submit such evidence or upon receipt of her response, ask a suitably-qualified examiner to review all evidence and express a FULLY-EXPLAINED opinion as to whether the Veteran’s service-connected depressive disorder and/or OSA disabilities were a causal or contributory cause of his death in early 2018. The examiner is advised that under the law, contributory cause of death is inherently one not related to the principal cause. In determining whether the service-connected disability contributed to death, it must be shown that it contributed substantially or materially; or that it combined to cause death; or that it aided or lent assistance to the production of death. It is not sufficient to show that it casually shared in producing death, but rather it must be shown that there was a causal connection. 5. Following the review and any additional development deemed necessary, readjudicate the claims. Should the claims not be granted in its entirety, issue an appropriate supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) and forward the claims to the Board for adjudication. The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). These claims must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West 2014). Vito A. Clementi Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Anwar, Attorney-Advisor 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.