Citation Nr: 21024987 Decision Date: 04/27/21 Archive Date: 04/27/21 DOCKET NO. 17-27 992 DATE: April 27, 2021 ORDER Entitlement a disability rating of 70 percent, and no higher, for adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood is granted throughout the entire period on appeal. Entitlement to a total disability rating based upon individual unemployability (TDIU) is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Throughout the entire period on appeal, it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood was manifested by symptoms of such severity, frequency, and duration so as to more nearly approximate occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood; his symptoms have not more nearly approximated total occupational and social impairment. 2. As the Veteran’s psychiatric disability is now rated as 70 percent disabling throughout the appeal period, he has one disability ratable at 60 percent or more for purposes of 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). 3. The Veteran’s service-connected adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood does not prevent him from securing or following substantially gainful employment. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the criteria for a 70 percent rating for adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood have been met for the entire period on appeal. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.3, 4.7, 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9440. 2. The criteria for entitlement to TDIU on a schedular basis throughout the appeal period have not been met. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from May 1987 to December 1991. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Salt Lake City, Utah. The RO granted an increase to 50 percent for the Veteran’s adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, effective September 18, 2015, the date of his increased-rating claim. Following the Veteran’s disagreement with rating assigned, the appeal came before the Board in March 2019, and the Board issued a decision that denied a disability rating in excess of 50 percent for the Veteran’s service-connected psychiatric disability. The Veteran appealed the Board’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In February 2020, the Court granted a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR) filed by the parties to the appeal (the Veteran, through an attorney, and representatives from VA General Counsel), thereby vacating the Board’s decision and remanding the matter for readjudication. Thereafter, in accordance with a February 2020 JMR directive, the Board, in an August 2020 remand, found that the issue of entitlement to a TDIU was reasonably raised by the record and remanded the increased rating claim and inferred claim for TDIU for additional development. There has been at least substantial compliance with the Board's remand directives. See D'Aries v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 97, 105 (2008); Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). 1. Entitlement a disability rating of 70 percent, and no higher, for adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood is granted. The Veteran seeks at least a 70 percent rating for his adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood. See May 2017 VA Form 9 (“I believe 70% is the least amount of a rating I should be given just because of how badly I suffer on a daily basis.”); December 2016 notice of disagreement (“I believe I qualify for at least a 70% or higher rating based upon my daily bouts with anxiety & depression”). Specifically, he argues: The anxiety level that I deal with everyday is unbelievably horrible. I have spoken to a couple of the VA counselors and they both have agreed that I suffer with sever anxiety and with major bouts of depression. They have tried given me medications to help with these service-related disabilities but the medication makes me feel sick. . . . I live with severe depression on a day to day basis. . . . With my anxiety disorder I suffer from all the daily symptoms that come with anxiety, no sleep, paranoia, anger, confusion, road rage, etc. etc. With the depression I deal with on a daily basis, is selflessness, why am I here, suicidal thoughts, uncontrollably crying for no reason at times. See December 2016 notice of disagreement. He also describes the following: Symptoms which decrease work efficiency. It's not listed in this section that I have been fired from every job that I have had since leaving the military. Because I can't get along with coworkers, I have no relationship to speak of with any friends, family members, etc. I suffer panic[] attacks daily. I suffer from high bouts of anxiety daily. Massive bouts of depression I suffer daily. Unprovoked battles of rage that lead to violent outbreaks that I have to lock myself in a room until I can calm myself down. I don't care about my personal appearance. I sometimes go weeks without a shower. I have difficulty adapting to everything around me. . . . I suffer daily of all the things listed here. I also have thoughts of suicide. I have seen 4 of the VA’s doctors and they all have said the same thing. Patient suffers from sever[e] anxiety, sever[e] depression etc. See May 2017 VA Form 9. Under the applicable rating criteria for PTSD, a 50 percent rating is warranted for occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity due to such symptoms as: flattened affect; circumstantial, circumlocutory, stereotyped speech; panic attacks more than once a week; difficulty in understanding complex commands; impairment of short- and long-term memory (e.g., retention of only highly earned material, forgetting to complete tasks); impaired judgement; impaired abstract thinking; disturbances of motivation and mood; and difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. 38 C.F.R. § 4.130. A 70 percent rating is warranted for occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking or mood, due to such symptoms as: suicidal ideation; obsessional rituals that interfere with routine activities; speech intermittently illogical, obscure, or irrelevant; near-continuous panic or depression affecting the ability to function independently, appropriately and effectively; impaired impulse control (such as unprovoked irritability with periods of violence); spatial disorientation; neglect of personal appearance and hygiene; difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances (including work or a work-like setting); and inability to establish and maintain effective relationships. Id. The maximum rating of 100 percent is warranted for total occupational and social impairment due to such symptoms as: gross impairment in thought processes or communication; persistent delusions or hallucinations; grossly inappropriate behavior; persistent danger of hurting self or others; intermittent inability to perform activities of daily living (including maintenance of minimal personal hygiene); disorientation to time or place; and memory loss for names of close relatives, own occupation, or own name. Id. The symptoms associated with the psychiatric rating criteria are not intended to constitute exhaustive lists, but rather serve as examples of the type and degree of symptoms, or their effects, that would justify a particular rating. Mauerhan v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 436, 443 (2002). Thus, the Board will consider whether the evidence demonstrates that a claimant suffers symptoms or effects that cause occupational or social impairment equivalent to what would be caused by the symptoms listed in the diagnostic code, and, if so, the equivalent rating will be assigned. Id. In Vazquez-Claudio, the Federal Circuit held that a Veteran may only qualify for a given disability rating by demonstrating the particular symptoms associated with that percentage, or others of similar severity, frequency, and duration. See Vazquez-Claudio v. Shinseki, 713 F.3d 112, 117 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (“Reading [38 C.F.R. §§ 4.126 and 4.130] together, it is evident that the frequency, severity, and duration of a Veteran’s symptoms must play an important role in determining his disability level.”). After carefully reviewing the evidence, the Board concludes that the Veteran’s service-connected PTSD symptomatology meet the criteria for a 70 percent rating for the entire period on appeal. In accordance with Mauerhan and Vazquez-Claudio, the Board recognizes that the Veteran demonstrated a wide range of psychiatric symptoms throughout the appeal period. For example, the Board notes the assertions he made in his notice of disagreement and VA Form 9 as mentioned above. As pointed out in the JMR, there is evidence suggesting that he exhibited symptoms consistent with difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances (work or work-like settings), neglect of personal appearance and hygiene, suicidal ideation, impaired impulse control, near-continuous panic and depression, and hallucinations. The Board notes the Court has emphasized the importance of suicidal ideation in considering the assignment of a 70 percent rating. See Bankhead v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 10, 22 (2017). Additionally, in a November 2015 VA examination, he stated that he was told he was unemployable due to mood swings, being irritated all the time, and not getting along with others. November 2015 VA examination report. In that examination, he stated the following: He reported daily panic attacks described as shutting down in bathroom and try to breathe through it and turn on hot water to get moisture in the air, takes 40 min to hour to go away and bad one “all day.” [] Sleep reported as 2 hrs if lucky, nightmares 3-4 x wk, about unknown things. . . . He [complains of being] irritated all of the time and does not like to be around others and difficulty being around others and told not fun to be around. He said he is frustrated with life, irritated and hates not having family around and tired of no money. Id. During the examination, the VA examiner noted that the Veteran reported fleeting suicidal intent, road rage, and being irritated. The examiner also checked the boxes for the following symptoms: depressed mood, anxiety, panic attacks more than once a week, chronic sleep impairment, and disturbances of motivation and mood. Id. In a September 2020 VA examination, the Veteran reported “he does not have much interaction with his older children, which has been a source of emotional pain and sadness” and “chronic difficulties relating to co-workers and managing anger.” September 2020 VA examination report. The examiner also checked the boxes for the following symptoms: depressed mood, anxiety, panic attacks more than once a week, chronic sleep impairment, and mild memory loss, such as forgetting names, directions or recent events. Id. The examiner noted that the “[V]eteran shows evidence of chronic, recurrent depression” and “[h]as periods of low moods, irritability, sadness, concentration problems, anxiety, and sleep problem.” Id. The examiner explained that “[f]unctional impairments that stem from depression include difficulties managing conflict and tolerating frustration as well as sufficient energy and motivation due to poor sleep.” Id. In addition to the above, VA treatment records likewise demonstrate symptoms of anxiety and depression disrupting his social and occupational functioning; trouble falling asleep; trouble staying asleep; a lack of interest or pleasure in doing things; feeling depressed, down or hopeless; problems falling asleep, staying asleep or sleeping too much; lack of energy; feeling tired; poor appetite or overeating; feeling like a failure, getting down on yourself; trouble concentrating; restless, fidgety or moving in slow motion; feeling like you would be better off dead or thinking about hurting yourself; irritability/anger; anxiety/worrying/panic attacks; and memory problems. See e.g. September 2015 VA treatment report. “He also reported symptoms of depression such as mood instability, worthlessness, anhedonia, and lack of energy.” Id. A November 2015 VA mental health interview reported the Veteran’s statements that “my anxiety is worse and worse,” “the depression comes and goes,” “I get panic attacks and I’m easily stressed and irritable,” and “I don’t sleep very well anymore and [m]y appetite comes and goes.” November 2015 VA treatment report. The Veteran “endorsed limited experiences of hearing his name called and no one is there—or his phone ring—but finds it is not ringing. He has also noted limited incidences when he hears mumbling or whispers—but no one is there. He has seen silhouettes but finds no one there—sees shadow people out of the corner of his eye—again no one there.” Id. Additionally, VA Vocational Rehabilitation, and Education (VRE) records noted that that the Veteran’s service-connected disability was associated with limitations/vocational impairments of “[c]oncentration, alertness, and coworker/manager relationship issues.” September 2015 VA counseling report. In assessing the severity, frequency, and duration of his symptoms as required by law and the terms of the JMR, the Board finds it significant that the September 2015 VA treatment provider expressly opined that “[h]is symptoms of anxiety and depression are escalating and appear to be causing more significant social and occupational dysfunction.” (Emphasis added). The November 2015 VA clinician also explained that the Veteran’s responses “resulted in a total score of 25, suggesting a ‘severe’ depression-which would seem to exceed the level expected with an adjustment disorder.” (Emphasis added). Significantly, the November 2015 VA clinician noted: He initially noted his sense of depression to come and go, but later reported a sense that it has never gone away. Upon further review, the [Veteran] endorsed experiencing a severity and duration of depression that would have met criteria for recurring episodes of major depressive episodes in the past, viewing these worsened episodes to have “come and gone” over the years, but with no sense of full inter-episode recovery. Effectively, he has noted a variable pattern of depression that has recently persisted for more than two years. With regard to anxiety, the November 2015 VA clinician stated: The [Veteran]'s responses, as noted below, resulted in a total score of 19, suggesting "Severe" anxiety. This too seems to exceed those levels expected for an Adjustment Disorder. Regardless to the original precipitating stressor, the [Veteran]'s report suggests the development of a more persistent pattern of anxiety symptoms -that has worsened over the years, with no remission, and which can trigger autonomic arousal and even a full panic attack. He endorses excessive worry that moves from one topic of concern to another. This pattern was evident in the session—noting his questions about a variety of concerns or worries. He also endorses constantly feeling on edge, irritable, notes muscle tension, an inability to relax and the anticipated pattern of sleep disturbance. Effectively, his report is now consistent with a diagnosis of GAD. Notably, this condition would account for his reported difficulties with "irritability" that has interfered with his functioning in the workplace. (Emphasis added). Thus, the symptoms of anxiety and depression in particular were described as “severe” and “persistent,” and causing “more significant social and occupational dysfunction.” Given all of the above, the Board resolves doubt in the Veteran’s favor and finds that his service-connected psychiatric symptoms throughout the appeal period were of such severity, frequency, and duration so as to more nearly approximate occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood throughout the appeal period in question. In assessing whether the next higher, 100 percent rating is warranted, however, the Board finds that the Veteran’s symptoms have not more nearly approximate total occupational and social impairment at any time during the appeal period. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.130. As noted above, the Veteran possesses a wide variety of symptoms associated with his service-connected disability, including, but not limited to, difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances (work or work-like settings), neglect of personal appearance and hygiene, suicidal ideation, impaired impulse control, near-continuous panic and depression, and hallucinations, irritability, sadness, memory and concentration problems, anxiety, difficulties managing conflict and tolerating frustration, as well as lack of sufficient energy and motivation due to poor sleep, a lack of interest or pleasure in doing things, poor appetite or overeating, feeling like a failure or better off dead or thinking about hurting yourself, mood instability, worthlessness, and anhedonia. Turning first to the effects of these various psychiatric symptoms on his social functioning, the evidence reflects that the Veteran is not totally socially impaired. Although the Veteran reported in his May 2017 VA Form 9 that “I have no relationship to speak of with any friends, family members, etc.,” this statement is inconsistent with other evidence in the record and is found to lack credibility. According to a September 2015 VA treatment record, it was noted that his symptoms were “disrupting his social and occupational functioning,” but he cared for his five-year-old daughter who was with him about 60 percent of the time. See September 2015 VA treatment report; September 2015 VRE counseling report (indicating he had 90 percent custody). The September 2015 VA treatment report listed his social supports as family and friends, and the Veteran mentioned that “he has a really large extended family with substantial social support.” In a November 2015 VA treatment record, he reported that an older daughter from his first marriage, a niece, and his mother “are his sole sources of social support.” According to the November 2015 VA examiner, the Veteran was described as being “socially isolated other than his stepdaughter who comes over to clean and he pays her and in touch with his mother who pays his rent” and noted that “[h]e was polite and cooperative” in the examination. It was also noted that he did “have friends but [was] so irritated I stay away from others.” At the more recent September 2020 VA examination report, the examiner observed his behavior as “friendly, engaging, and affable.” Additional VA treatment records through February 2020 noted that he continued to share custody of his child and list his mother as family support. The probative evidence above demonstrates that even though the Veteran’s symptoms do impair his social functioning, that impairment does not rise to the level of total social impairment. Rather, the most probative evidence suggests that he possesses social functioning to a degree that allows him to be able to maintain shared custody of his daughter and maintain a supportive relationship with his mother. The Board therefore concludes that total social impairment is not found. Further, with regard to his occupational functioning, despite the Veteran’s reports of being “unemployable,” he has been employed at various times throughout the appeal period. See, e.g., October 2016 VA treatment record (“He notes having dry skin, since he works as a mechanic and washes his hands frequently.”); February 2018 VA treatment record (noting he “works as heavy duty mechanic and [is] able to work” and is “unable to do MOVE [program] due to work”); December 2018 VA treatment record (noting the Veteran received his influenza immunization in October 2017 at work); February 2020 VA treatment record (noting the Veteran is currently working for Weber State college); and September 2020 VA examination report (noting he “is currently employed as a mechanic, where he works on cars and heavy equipment”). Given the work history he has provided to VA clinicians, total occupational impairment also has not been shown. The Board’s conclusion as to overall impairment is further supported by the occupational and social assessments of the two VA psychiatric examiners during the appeal period. Specifically, the November 2015 examiner summarized the Veteran’s level of occupational and social impairment as “[o]ccupational and social impairment due to mild or transient symptoms which decrease work efficiency and ability to perform occupational tasks only during periods of significant stress, or; symptoms controlled by medication,” and the most recent September 2020 VA examiner summarized it as “[o]ccupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks, although generally functioning satisfactorily, with normal routine behavior, self-care and conversation.” Thus, notwithstanding the wide range of reported symptoms and the severity/duration/frequency of those symptoms, the evidence demonstrates impairment that corresponds with the 70 percent rating, at most, and not an overall impairment that rises to a level that more nearly approximates total occupational and social impairment equal to that of a 100 percent rating. To be clear, the Board does not suggest that the Veteran has not demonstrated any symptoms akin to those provided in the diagnostic criteria of 38 C.F.R. § 4.130 for a 100 percent rating. For example, the Board expressly acknowledges evidence of hallucinations, as discussed by the JMR, where the Veteran reported that he occasionally saw and heard things that were not there, and he saw shadows and thought people were in the house. See also November 2015 VA treatment record (The Veteran “endorsed limited experiences of hearing his name called and no one is there—or his phone ring—but finds it is not ringing. He has also noted limited incidences when he hears mumbling or whispers—but no one is there. He has seen silhouettes but finds no one there—sees shadow people out of the corner of his eye—again no one there.”). The Board likewise notes that “persistent delusions or hallucinations” is one of the examples of symptoms listed under the criteria for a 100 percent rating. However, in evaluating the duration, severity, and frequency of the reported symptoms, the hallucinations were described as “limited experiences” and as occurring “occasionally.” Additionally, these hallucinations, in combination with the other symptoms shown and corresponding severity/frequency/duration, have not rendered the Veteran totally occupationally and socially impaired, as discussed in more detail above. The Court has emphasized that the use of the term “such as” demonstrates that the symptoms after that phrase are not intended to constitute an exhaustive list, but rather are to serve as examples of the type and degree of the symptoms, or their effects, that would justify a particular rating. See Mauerhan, 16 Vet. App. at 442. Further, the Federal Register accompanying the 1996 amendment to Diagnostic Code 9411 explains, “it is not the symptoms, but their effects, that determine the level of impairment.” See 61 Fed. Reg. 52,695, 52,697 (Oct. 8, 1996). Here, the Board finds that the Veteran’s service-connected psychiatric symptoms are not shown to be of such duration, severity, and frequency so as to result in total occupational and social impairment of the nature described by a 100 percent rating at any time during the appeal period. Although it may be conceded Veteran’s symptoms have resulted in social and occupational impairment to a certain degree, that impairment does not more nearly approximate total social and occupational impairment. In summary, the Board finds that a disability rating of 70 percent, but no higher, is warranted throughout the appeal period for the Veteran’s service-connected adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depression. The appeal is granted to this extent only. 2. Entitlement to TDIU is denied. In its August 2020 remand, the Board recognized that TDIU was raised by the record, explaining that the Veteran stated that he is unemployed, was fired from his previous positions, could not get hired because of his irritability and difficulty getting along with coworkers, and that he had significant aggravation of his adjustment disorder while performing his job requirements. See September 2015 VA treatment record and November 2015 VA examination; see also May 2017 VA Form 9. TDIU may be assigned to a veteran who meets certain disability percentage thresholds and is “unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of service-connected disabilities.” 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). “Marginal employment shall not be considered substantially gainful employment.” Id. Regarding marginal employment, 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a) states: For purposes of this section, marginal employment generally shall be deemed to exist when a veteran’s earned annual income does not exceed the amount established by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, as the poverty threshold for one person. Marginal employment may also be held to exist, on a facts found basis (includes but is not limited to employment in a protected environment such as a family business or sheltered workshop), when earned annual income exceeds the poverty threshold. Consideration shall be given in all claims to the nature of the employment and the reason for termination. Id. Further, in determining whether the Veteran is entitled to a TDIU rating, neither non-service-connected disabilities nor advancing age may be considered. 38 C.F.R. § 4.19. In this case, the Veteran is service connected for a single disability: adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depression. Pursuant to the Board’s determination herein, the Veteran’s psychiatric disability is assigned a 70 percent disabling throughout the appeal period. Based on the increased rating assigned, the Veteran now meets the threshold minimum percentage criteria in 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a) for consideration of TDIU on a schedular basis throughout the appeal period. The crux of the matter lies in whether the evidence sufficiently shows that the Veteran is “unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of service-connected disabilities,” the standard of entitlement set forth under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). After carefully reviewing the evidence of record, and for the reasons set forth below, the Board finds that the weight of the evidence is against such a finding. The Board acknowledges the Veteran’s statements from 2015 that his service-connected adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depression rendered him “unemployable.” See also September 2015 VA treatment report (noting the Veteran’s unemployment); September 2015 VRE Counseling record (“The Veteran is currently unemployed”); November 2015 VA examination report (“He reports being unemployed for the past 3 years, has worked as a mechanic and reports being good at that work but c/o unable to find employment due to irritable and difficulty getting along with coworkers.”); November 2015 VA treatment record (“[Veteran] to cancel today due to conflicting job interview.”); December 2015 VA treatment record (Occupation: unemployed; heavy equip mechanic”). Additionally, the Board notes that the September 2020 VA examiner opined that his psychiatric disability “at least as likely as not to render him unable to secure and sustain substantially gainful employment.” In rationale therefore, the VA examiner stated that “[e]xam[ination] findings indicate that he has been unable to maintain employment due to frequent interpersonal conflicts that stem from his depression. Functional impairments that stem from depression include difficulties managing conflict and tolerating frustration as well as sufficient energy and motivation due to poor sleep.” However, the Veteran has reported being employed as a mechanic in VA treatment records and examinations after 2015. See, e.g., October 2016 VA treatment record (“He notes having dry skin, since he works as a mechanic and washes his hands frequently.”); February 2018 VA treatment record (noting he “works as heavy duty mechanic and [is] able to work” and is “unable to do MOVE [program] due to work”); December 2018 VA treatment record (noting the Veteran received his influenza immunization in October 2017 at work); February 2020 VA treatment record (noting the Veteran is currently working for Weber State college); and September 2020 VA examination report (noting he “is currently employed as a mechanic, where he works on cars and heavy equipment”). Therefore, the Veteran’s statements of unemployability, including those upon which the positive TDIU opinion is based, are inconsistent with the employment history that he himself provided to VA clinicians after 2015. Given the inconsistencies in the record with regard to the Veteran’s work history and status, his statements claiming that his service-connected disability prevents him from obtaining and maintaining substantially gainful employment lack credibility and are without probative value. The November 2020 VA examiner’s opinion, likewise, that is based on the Veteran’s statements to that effect is likewise found to lack probative value. Instead, the most probative evidence shows that the Veteran has been working as a mechanic from 2016 forward. The Veteran also made inconsistent statements regarding his VRE counseling. In this respect, contrary to the Veteran’s report to the November 2015 VA examiner that “reporting that voc rehab in Ogden said employment does not look good for him,” the April 2016 VRE closure statement instead reflected: This Veteran’s case is being discontinued out of interrupted status due to a lack of pursuit. The Veteran’s case has largely been inactive since the IEEP was written and signed on 09/29/2015. Veteran had surgery but was expected to be able to complete the career exploration objective early on in the plan. The Veteran has made no attempt to remain engaged in the evaluation process, however, [h]e was not medically released for activity until 11/2015. At that time VRC tasked him with career exploration activities and Veteran was to report findings Veteran has not responded to attempts to contact since the 11/24/2015 meeting. The EC has tried to reach the Veteran via email without success. On 02-19-2016. an interruption letter was sent to the Veteran requesting that he contact me within 30 days if he wished for his case to remain open. There has been no response even though the 30 days have passed. It is noted that VBMS shows the Veterans disability rating for SC adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood was increased from 30% to 50% effective 09-18-2015 Veteran received notification letter dated 12-22-2015. After his young daughter was added as a dependent, his C&P payment increased from $407.75 to $890.13 per month. This is a possible disincentive for seeking employment. At this time, I believe the Veteran’s case should be discontinued due to the fact that he is not participating in a plan of services and has not responded to my attempts to reach him. The Veteran’s employment status is unknown. At last contact [in November 2015], he was unemployed and seeking a job. He reported that he had been unemployed for 3 years.” See April 2016 VRE closure statement (emphasis added). In considering TDIU, the Board has looked at the Veteran’s skills and educational background that he provided on a resume with his September 2015 VRE application. See VRE resume. In addition to a significant work history as a mechanic, his resume also noted that he had obtained an Associate’s Degree and received N.O.C.T.I. (Journeymen Diesel Certification) and OWATC (Automated Tech Repair (ATM)). Id. In his resume, he also reported having heating ventilation/air conditioning, auto safety inspection, and forklift licenses, as well as several occupational certificates, such as for hazardous materials and welding. Id. In order to gather evidence in support of his claim for TDIU, the Board remanded the claim in August 2020 in order to request that the Veteran complete and return a VA Form 21-8940 (Veteran’s Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability). However, he did not provide the requested information. In this regard, it is well established that the duty to assist is not a one-way street. Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190 (1991). Without any information from the Veteran regarding the dates of his employment, his gross earnings, and/or whether his work was in a protected environment such as a family business or sheltered workshop, the most probative evidence of record shows that the Veteran has been able to obtain and maintain non-marginal employment as a mechanic for the vast majority of the appeal period, from at least 2016 onward and continuing until the present. This cogent evidence of employment for more than four years weighs heavily against a finding of TDIU. Because the weight of the evidence establishes that the Veteran’s service-connected disability does not preclude the obtaining and following of a substantially gainful occupation, the Board finds that the claim for TDIU must be denied. John Kitlas Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Gielow, 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.