Citation Nr: 21000179
Decision Date: 01/04/21	Archive Date: 01/04/21

DOCKET NO. 16-18 716
DATE: January 4, 2021

REMANDED

A rating in excess of 50 percent for dysthymic disorder is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from December 1968 to September 1970.

This matter was originally before the Board on appeal from an August 2013 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The claim was denied in a December 2018 Board decision. The Veteran appealed to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In a September 2019 Order, the Court remanded the claim to the Board for compliance with a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR). In accordance with the JMR, the Board remanded the issue for further development in a February 2020 decision. The case is now before the undersigned.

This issue was remanded by the Board in February 2020 for a new VA examination. The Veteran underwent a new VA examination in August 2020 and a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) was issued in September 2020. The Veteran underwent another VA examination in October 2020. However, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) did not issue a SSOC discussing and evaluating the new evidence.

Under 38 C.F.R. § 19.31(c), the AOJ must issue a SSOC pursuant to a Board remand unless the evidence was already considered in a prior Statement of the Case or SSOC or the remand instructions specified that issuance of a SSOC was not required. Here, the October 2020 VA examination has not been evaluated by the AOJ. The February 2020 remand does not specify that an issuance of a SSOC was not required. Accordingly, remand is necessary for the AOJ to issue a SSOC considering all the evidence of record.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. The AOJ should obtain updated VA and non-VA treatment records.

The AOJ should readjudicate the issue on appeal, to include consideration of the relevant medical evidence received following the September 2020 SSOC. If any benefits sought are not granted, the Veteran and his representative should be provided with an SSOC and afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond before the record is returned to the Board for further review.

 

 

Tiffany Dawson

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	I. Kerner, 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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.