Citation Nr: 25004805
Decision Date: 04/09/25	Archive Date: 04/09/25

DOCKET NO. 14-42 084
DATE: April 9, 2025

REMANDED

Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. 

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from May 1978 to March 1993.

In an August 2012 rating decision, a Regional Office (RO) denied an increased rating for sarcoidosis and the Veteran appealed that rating decision to the Board. 

The RO denied entitlement to a TDIU by way of a January 2018 rating decision; this decision went unappealed. 

In a February 2022 decision, the Board denied a higher rating for the sarcoidosis with pulmonary and skin involvement, which was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court).  In an August 2023 Memorandum Decision, the Court vacated the Board's February 2022 decision to the extent that it denied a rating greater than 30 percent for the sarcoidosis prior to December 12, 2011, and thereafter.  In addition, the Court found that the claim for a TDIU rating had been raised on appeal to the Court and was now part of the Veteran's appeal.

In a May 2024 decision the Board readjudicated the issue of entitlement to higher ratings for sarcoidosis. Board decisions are final when issued. The Board also remanded the issue of entitlement to a TDIU.  As the issue of entitlement to higher ratings for sarcoidosis has already been adjudicated, and the only remaining issue before the Board is entitlement to a TDIU. 

Entitlement to a TDIU is remanded. 

A review of the record reveals that additional VA-generated evidence relevant to the Veteran's TDIU claim was added to the file in December 2024, January 2025, and March 2025 after a November 2024 supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) was issued.

In February 2025, the Veteran was notified that this evidence was not previously considered in a decision by the RO. The Veteran was notified that she has the right to have the RO review it in the first instance. She was informed that if she did not respond within 45 days of the correspondence, the Board will assume that she does not wish to have the Board decide the claim at this time, and that the case would be remanded to the RO for review. There has been no response from the Veteran or her representative. 

Because the Veteran has not waived RO consideration of the relevant, VA-generated evidence, the Board must remand this matter. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1305(c).

The matter is REMANDED for the following action:

Review the additional, relevant evidence received after the November 2024 SSOC and readjudicate entitlement to TDIU, considering any evidence submitted since the most recent SSOC. 

(Continued on the next page)

?

If the benefit sought remains denied, issue a new SSOC and provide the Veteran and her representative the requisite period of time to respond. The case should then be returned to the Board for further appellate review, if otherwise in order.

 

 

D. JOHNSON

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	M. Prem, 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.