Citation Nr: 25002003
Decision Date: 02/11/25	Archive Date: 02/11/25

DOCKET NO. 17-46 757
DATE: February 11, 2025

REMANDED

Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU), prior to February 3, 2014, is remanded.  

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from July 1970 to July 1972. 

This matter was previously remanded by the Board in July 2022 and August 2023.

1. Entitlement to TDIU, prior to February 3, 2014, is remanded.  

Although the Board regrets the delay associated with this remand, the issue of entitlement to TDIU is inextricably intertwined with the Veteran's pending claims for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).  

The Board notes, as a matter of procedural history, that the Veteran's claims for PTSD and TDIU were previously being adjudicated concurrently.  However, the claims entered separate appeal streams in August 2023 when the Board denied the Veteran's PTSD claims while remanding his claim for TDIU.  See August 2023 Board Decision.  The Veteran appealed the Board's August 2023 decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court).  The Court granted a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) which returned the Veteran's PTSD claims to the Board.  See April 2024 Court Order.  The Board subsequently remanded the PTSD claims in September 2024 and January 2025.   

In January 2025, the Board remanded three issues pertaining to the Veteran's PTSD rating.  See January 2025 Board Decision.   Those issues were: Entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 30 percent disabling, for the period prior to August 22, 2011, for service-connected PTSD; Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 50 percent disabling, for the period from August 22, 2011, to February 2, 2014, for service-connected PTSD; and, Entitlement to an effective date prior to February 2, 2014, for the award of a 100 percent evaluation for service-connected PTSD.  Id. 

The Board notes that the that the outcome of the Veteran's pending claims pertaining to PTSD could have a significant impact on his claim for TDIU.  See Brambley v. Principi, 17 Vet. App. 20, 24 (2003). As such, these claims are inextricably intertwined, and the appropriate remedy is remand.  See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180 (1991) (stating that issues are "inextricably intertwined" when a decision on one issue would have a "significant impact" on a claim for the second issue).   

Given the above, the claim of entitlement to TDIU, prior to February 3, 2014, is remanded. 

(continued on next page)

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. After the Veteran's pending PTSD claims have been adjudicated, readjudicate the claim of entitlement to TDIU prior to February 3, 2014.    

 

 

YVETTE R. WHITE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Zachary J. Ellis, 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.