Citation Nr: 21070597
Decision Date: 11/24/21	Archive Date: 11/24/21

DOCKET NO. 16-53 537A
DATE: November 24, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from July 1980 from December 1980.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).  The Board denied the claim in December 2018 and April 2020 decisions which the Veteran appealed to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court).  In October 2019 and December 2020, pursuant to Joint Motions for Remand (JMR), the Court vacated and remanded the decisions for further evidentiary development.  

Entitlement to a TDIU is remanded.

The Veteran's service-connected duodenitis with gastric reflux and history of duodenal ulcer was last evaluated in an April 2019 VA examination.  The examiner determined that the disability resulted in no functional impact.  However, as noted in the December 2020 JMR, no rationale for this finding was provided.  As such, the Court stated that a new medical opinion with adequate rationale should be sought upon remand.  Accordingly, remand is needed to obtain such an opinion.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. Obtain a VA medical opinion regarding the functional impact of the Veteran's service-connected duodenitis with gastric reflux and history of duodenal ulcer.  The need for a physical examination is left to the discretion of the clinician writing the opinion.  The clinician is asked to review the file and following such review, address the following:

(a.) What is the functional impact of the Veteran's service-connected duodenal ulcer condition? 

(b.) The clinician is reminded that the Veteran's current employment status has no bearing on how his disability would affect his ability to maintain employment.

(c.) The clinician is specifically asked to address the February 2015 VA examiner's finding that the disability prevented the Veteran from performing heavy lifting, repetitive bending, and sit-ups.  

(d.) The clinician is also specifically asked to address the Veteran's lay statements of record describing the limitations caused by his service-connected disability.  

(e.) All opinions should be accompanied by supporting rationale explaining how the clinician arrived at the conclusions expressed.

2. Ensure that the requested opinion is associated with the claim file.  After completing the above, and any additionally indicated development, readjudicate the claim.

 

 

SHEREEN M. MARCUS

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Rachel E. Jensen, 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.