Citation Nr: 21027613
Decision Date: 05/06/21	Archive Date: 05/06/21

DOCKET NO. 10-28 485
DATE: May 6, 2021

REMANDED

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

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from May 1966 to May 1968.  This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2008 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

In March 2011, the Veteran testified at a Travel Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge.  A transcript of that hearing is associated with the record.

In January 2019 and November 2020, the Board remanded the case for further development.

Entitlement to a TDIU is remanded.

Adjudicating the TDIU claim requires consideration of the ratings assigned for service-connected disabilities and the impact they have on the ability to work.  38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a), (b).  As such, the issue of entitlement to a TDIU is inextricably intertwined with pending higher rating issues.  The issues for an earlier effective date for lumbar strain with myositis, and higher ratings for bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy and for unspecified depressive disorder in other appeals are currently before the Board.  Until they are resolved, adjudication of a TDIU must be deferred.  See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991) (noting the prohibition against the adjudication of claims that are inextricably intertwined is based upon the recognition that claims related to each other should not be subject to piecemeal decision-making or appellate litigation).  The Veteran can assist in ensuring that all relevant evidence is available in the meantime. 

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

After all pending higher ratings issues are resolved, readjudicate the issue of entitlement to a TDIU.  Allow the Veteran and his representative time to respond before returning this issue, if it remains denied, to the Board.

 

 

L. CHU

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	M. J. In, 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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.