Citation Nr: 21074178 Decision Date: 12/14/21 Archive Date: 12/14/21 DOCKET NO. 17-48 642 DATE: December 14, 2021 ORDER New and material evidence having been received, the Veteran's service-connection claim for eczema is reopened. Service connection for eczema, on a secondary basis, is granted. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is dismissed as moot. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. In a June 2016 rating decision, the regional office (RO) denied the Veteran's service-connection claim for eczema. The Veteran filed a Notice of Disagreement (NOD) in November 2016. While the appeal was pending, the Veteran informed VA that she wished to withdraw her November 2016 NOD. 2. Since the June 2016 rating decision, new evidence has been received that relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the Veteran's eczema claim. 3. The Veteran's eczema is proximately due to service-connected posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with major depressive disorder. 4. The Veteran filed a claim for a TDIU on November 5, 2016, which she withdrew on November 29, 2016. 5. The Veteran's most recent claim for a TDIU was received on June 25, 2017. 6. The award of a 100 percent rating for PTSD with major depressive disorder, along with the award of SMC at the housebound rate, has rendered the issue of entitlement to a TDIU moot for all times relevant to the appeal period. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The June 2016 rating decision that denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for eczema is final. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.1103. 2. As evidence received since the June 2016 rating decision is new and material, the criteria for reopening the claim for service connection for eczema are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5108, 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156. 3. The criteria for service connection for eczema as secondary to service-connected PTSD with major depressive disorder are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.310. 4. Entitlement to a TDIU is dismissed as moot. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from May 1985 to October 1993. On her September 2017 VA Form 9, the Veteran requested a videoconference hearing, but later withdrew her hearing request in February 2019 Correspondence. New and Material Evidence The Regional Office (RO) denied the Veteran's service-connection claim for eczema in a June 2016 rating decision, in pertinent part based on a finding that the condition neither occurred in nor was caused by service. The Veteran initiated an appeal by filing a Notice of Disagreement in November 2016; however, the Veteran subsequently told VA in November 2016 that she wished to withdraw the NOD. The RO confirmed her withdrawal in a November 30, 2016 letter, and offered her and her representative 30 days to indicate if that was not her intent. Neither the Veteran nor her representative responded to the November 2016 letter. As such, the June 2016 rating decision became final. Since the June 2016 rating decision, the Veteran has advanced a theory based on secondary service connection, and in support of that theory, has submitted a private medical record suggesting that her eczema is aggravated by stress. The Board finds such evidence to be new and material under the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.156. The appeal is accordingly reopened. Service Connection As noted above, the Veteran contends that her eczema is due to her service-connected posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with major depressive disorder with psychotic features. Service connection may be granted for a disability that is proximately due to, or aggravated by, service-connected disease or injury. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310. The record shows a diagnosis of dyshidrotic hand eczema. See February 2016 private treatment record. The Veteran is service-connected for PTSD with major depressive disorder. In favor of the claim is an August 2011 VA treatment record in which the Veteran told her VA provider that she had "anxious eczema;" a November 2015 treatment note from the Veteran's private provider indicating that her eczema was "stress induced;" and a February 2016 private prescription note indicating that the Veteran had dyshidrotic hand eczema that was aggravated by stress. There is no evidence contrary to the favorable medical evidence. Accordingly, after resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, service connection for eczema is granted as secondary to service-connected PTSD with major depressive disorder. Entitlement to a TDIU By way of relevant history, the Veteran originally filed a claim for a TDIU in March 2016. While the claim was being developed, a June 2016 rating decision granted service connection for PTSD with major depressive disorder with psychotic features and assigned a 100 percent rating effective January 15, 2016. That rating decision also granted entitlement to SMC based on the housebound criteria. In a June 2016 letter to the Veteran notifying her of the June 2016 rating action, the RO indicated that the assignment of the 100 percent rating had rendered her claim for TDIU moot. She subsequently filed another claim for a TDIU in November 2016. Also in November 2016, she submitted a Notice of Disagreement (NOD) with the June 2016 rating decision. Although the June 2016 rating decision had not adjudicated the issue of entitlement to a TDIUas the issue was deemed mootthe Veteran indicated in her November 2016 that she was disagreeing with the denial of a TDIU. As documented in a Report of General Information dated November 29, 2016, it was confirmed by the Veteran that she wished to withdraw both her November 2016 claim for a TDIU as well as her November 2016 NOD, as it was explained to her that she was in receipt of a 100 percent rating. A November 30, 2016 letter to the Veteran memorialized the information and indicated that if she did not intend to withdraw her claim, she had 30 days from the date of the letter to reinstate it. The Veteran did not contact the RO within 30 days to reinstate her claim. Subsequently, the Veteran filed a new claim for a TDIU on June 25, 2017. The August 2017 rating decision on appeal denied entitlement to a TDIU. The Veteran submitted a timely NOD, and this appeal followed. In light of this procedural history, the Board must conclude that the issue of entitlement to a TDIU is moot for all times relevant to the appeal period, i.e., from June 25, 2017, including the one-year look-back period, as the Veteran has been in receipt of a 100 percent rating for her PTSD as well as SMC benefits since January 2016. To the extent that there is an earlier, November 2016 claim, the Board finds that it does not remain pending, as the Veteran withdrew that claim. See the November 2016 Report of General Information (memorializing her intent to withdraw the claim), and November 30, 2016 letter from the RO (recognizing the withdrawn claim, and offering an opportunity to reinstate it within 30 days if withdrawal was not her intent). As noted above, neither the Veteran nor her representative responded to the November 30, 2016 letter. Rather a new claim for TDIU was filed in June 2017. Thus, the Board can conclude that the Veteran did not wish to take action on the November 2016 claim. Based on the above, the Board finds that entitlement to a TDIU is moot throughout the appeal period, which stems one year prior to the date of the June 2017 claim ot the present. During that time period, the Veteran was in receipt of a 100 percent rating and SMC benefits based on the housebound rate. There is no further benefit that would extend to the Veteran with a TDIU award for the time period from June 2016. Accordingly, the appeal for a TDIU is dismissed. V. Chiappetta Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Polly Johnson, 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.