Citation Nr: 25005097 Decision Date: 04/15/25 Archive Date: 04/15/25 DOCKET NO. 14-43 756 DATE: April 15, 2025 REMANDED Prior to September 16, 2024, a rating greater than 10 percent for radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve; Baxter's neuritis of the left lower extremity associated with lumbar strain, is remanded. Prior to September 16, 2024, a rating greater than 10 percent for radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve; Baxter's neuritis of the right lower extremity associated with lumbar strain, is remanded. Prior to September 16, 2024, a rating greater than 10 percent for lumbar strain is remanded. After September 16, 2024, a rating greater than 20 percent for radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve; Baxter's neuritis of the left lower extremity associated with lumbar strain, is remanded. After September 16, 2024, a rating greater than 20 percent for radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve; Baxter's neuritis of the right lower extremity associated with lumbar strain, is remanded. After September 16, 2024, a rating greater than 20 percent for lumbar strain is remanded. . REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from June 1984 to July 1984 and the United States Army from August 1985 to July 1992, including foreign service. For his meritorious service, the Veteran was awarded (among other decorations) the Combat Infantryman Badge and the Southwest Asia Service Medal with two Bronze Service Stars. The Veteran testified as to these matters during a November 2018 videoconference hearing. A transcript of this proceeding has been associated with the record. Historically and in pertinent part, these appeals were denied by the Board in July 2020. However, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) issued a Memorandum Decision in June 2021 which vacated the Board's denials and remanded the matters for further consideration. Following additional development, the Board again denied these appeals in April 2022. Regrettably, the Court again vacated the Board's decision and remanded the issues for further review in May 2023. Following direction from the Court, the Board remanded these issues in November 2023 to allow for the AOJ to obtain a March 2017 VA ankle examination which was not previously of record. The identified examination was obtained that same month, a copy of which was both associated with the claims file and provided to the Veteran. Thereafter, an October 2024 rating decision was issued which, in part, awarded service connection for radiculopathy of the left and right femoral nerves. The Veteran submitted a Supplemental Claim in November 2024, partly challenging the matters currently on appeal in addition to the awards for femoral nerves. Given this procedural history, the Board construes the Supplemental Claim as a request to pursue the femoral nerve appeals under the AMA and through AOJ review; as such, these issues are not included herein. As to the instant matters, the Veteran was sent a letter in February 2025 which identified additional evidence that had been received since the most recent Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC). (Of note, the letter stated that this SSOC was issued in June 2020; however, it is apparent that the most recent SSOC for this appeal stream was issued in October 2024. However, VA properly established that the additional evidence, including VA and private treatment records, had been obtained after the issuance of this SSOC.) The same month, the Veteran requested that the case be remanded to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for review of the additional evidence. In compliance with the Veteran's request, the matters are hereby remanded for AOJ review and issuance of a new SSOC. [CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE] The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Readjudicate the pending appeals. If any of the benefits sought remain denied, issue an SSOC to the Veteran and his representative and provide an appropriate period for response. Evan M. Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Kovarovic, Kate 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.