Citation Nr: 21007293 Decision Date: 02/09/21 Archive Date: 02/09/21 DOCKET NO. 13-35 848 DATE: February 9, 2021 REMANDED A total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1996 to October 2000. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2012 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This appeal has a long procedural history and been before the Board previously. In October 2020, the Board remanded the issue on appeal for the Veteran to complete an updated VA Form 21-8940 to better understand the Veteran’s current employment situation and earnings. This matter has now returned to the Board for appellate consideration. A TDIU. The Veteran seeks entitlement to a TDIU. Specifically, he asserts that his service-connected disabilities prevent him from securing or following any substantially gainful occupation since October 2008. Additionally, he contends that he has difficulty concentrating, focusing, interacting with people, and being in crowded places. Further, he asserts that he has difficulty following conversations and with his short-term memory, such as remembering names or forgetting he left the stove on or that he put something in the microwave. In addition, he stated that the longest he had been able to hold a job since service was six months. See 8/25/2010 VA Form 21-8940; see also 5/17/2017 Hearing Transcript, at pages 10-18; 7/3/2018 VA Form 21-8940; 3/21/2019 C&P Examination, at page 4. As mentioned above, the October 2020 Board remand instructed the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) to provide the Veteran with a VA Form 21-8940 for the Veteran to submit updated employment information. Pursuant to the October 2020 remand, the AOJ sent the Veteran the VA form 21-8940 (Veteran’s Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability). See 10/16/2020 Subsequent Development Letter. However, the evidence of record indicates that the Veteran did not submit the requested form or otherwise respond to the AOJ’s October 2020 correspondence. If the Veteran and his representative wish to pursue this matter, the Board encourages them to submit the requested form. The Board will allow the Veteran and his representative another opportunity to submit a completed VA form 21-8940 to pursue the claim of entitlement to a TDIU. While the form itself does not need to be submitted, the Board needs to have the record supplemented with the Veteran's employment information to more precisely understand the nature of the Veteran's employment during the appeal period, to include in the assessment as to whether any employment the Veteran has had during the appeal period, was marginal or protected in nature. In remanding this matter, the Veteran is notified that the duty to assist is not a one-way street; a claimant is obligated to cooperate in the development of a pending claim. Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 193 (1991). In short, any further failure to submit the request information may result in the denial of the issues on appeal. The Veteran is also notified that pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.158(a), when evidence requested in connection with a claim for increase is not furnished within 1 year after the date of the request, the claim is considered abandoned. 38 U.S.C. § 501; 38 C.F.R. § 3.158(a).   This matter is REMANDED for the following action: Again, provide the Veteran and his representative with VA Form 21-8940 (Veteran’s Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability), and advise him to complete and return the form to support his claim of entitlement to a TDIU. Informed the Veteran that the Board needs to have the record supplemented with the Veteran's employment information (and any updated education and or training) to more precisely understand the nature of the Veteran's employment during the appeal period, to include in the assessment as to whether any employment the Veteran has had during the appeal period, was marginal or protected in nature. Additionally, inform the Veteran of the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.158(a). Paul Sorisio Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Fuentes, 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.