Citation Nr: 21077575
Decision Date: 12/30/21	Archive Date: 12/30/21

DOCKET NO. 17-50 498
DATE: December 30, 2021

REMANDED

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

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from June 1989 to February 1995, including service in the Persian Gulf War.

This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of June 2015 and May 2017 rating decisions by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This case was last before the Board in October 2020, when the Board remanded multiple issues, including TDIU, for further development. The case is now before the Board. 

In a letter dated October 27, 2021, the Board informed the Veteran that it had received additional evidence in support of the Veteran's appeal, including VA treatment and VA examination records. The Board requested that the Veteran submit an Additional Evidence Response Form indicating whether the Veteran would like the Board to remand this case back to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for review of the additional evidence in the first instance. The Board noted that if it did not receive a response within 45 days of the letter, it would remand the appeal to the AOJ for review. As no response has been received to date after 45 days, the Board will remand this case to the AOJ for readjudication considering the additional evidence in the first instance.

The matter is REMANDED for the following action:

Readjudicate the issues on appeal in light of all of the additional evidence added to the record since the January 2021 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC). If any of the benefits sought are not granted, issue a further SSOC before returning the claim to the Board, if otherwise in order.

 

 

A. C. MACKENZIE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	D. Hetman

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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.