Citation Nr: 25009101 Decision Date: 07/11/25 Archive Date: 07/11/25 DOCKET NO. 20-01 985 DATE: July 11, 2025 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The appellant is a veteran (the Veteran) who had active-duty service from April 1966 to February 1968 including verified service in Vietnam from February 28, 1967, to February 24, 1968. This appeal comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a March 2023 Order of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC). It originates from an October 2018 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This matter was previously before the Board in July 2024. The decision denied service connection to a psychiatric disability. The Veteran appealed the July 2024 Board decision to the CAVC. In a February 2025 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), the CAVC vacated and remanded the claim. CAVC found the Board provided inadequate reasons and bases. Specifically, CAVC found: The Board erred when it failed to substantially comply with the March 2023 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR)... The March 2023 JMR instructed VA to obtain a medical opinion that adequately addresses Appellant's lay statements related to his psychiatric symptoms before and after service. [R. at 588-589]. Specifically, the JMR noted Appellant's reports that "upon his return from Vietnam, he had a substantial alcohol abuse problem and referred to himself as having anger management difficulties." [R. at 7691 (7688-96) (September 2013 Disability Benefits Questionnaire)]. It also noted Appellant's reports that during service he was in "a continuous state of hyper-vigilance during [the] day" and that he was kept up "most of the night with total emotional distress." [R. at 8081 (8080-85) (July 2012 Correspondence)]. Further, the JMR noted Appellant's reports that, after service, he cried himself to sleep "every night for many years and still [does]," still has nightmares and flashbacks about the war, and he "smelled death and until this day [he] can still smell that horrible experience." [R. at 8082]. Here, VA obtained a medical opinion in January 2024, but the examiner failed to address Appellant's lay statements as instructed by the March 2023 JMR. [R. at 180-181 (178-183)]. Thus, remand is warranted for VA to obtain a medical opinion that substantially complies with the March 2023 JMR and adequately addresses Appellant's lay statements. Accordingly, the Board finds remand is warranted and the VA examiner must address the lay statements provided by the Veteran. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule an appropriate VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any acquired mental disorder in existence at any time pertinent to the September 17, 2018, claim on appeal. The relevant documents in the claims file should be made available to the VA examiner. All indicated tests and studies should be accomplished. For any mental disorder diagnosed, the VA examiner is requested to offer an opinion as to whether it is approximately as likely as not that such disorder is causally or etiologically related to the Veteran's active service. The examiner should be provided with the Veteran's statements. Specifically, the examiner should discuss and consider the following statements: a. September 2013 Disability Benefits Questionnaire- "upon his return from Vietnam, he had a substantial alcohol abuse problem and referred to himself as having anger management difficulties." b. July 2012 Correspondence- during service he was in "a continuous state of hyper-vigilance during [the] day" and that he was kept up "most of the night with total emotional distress." c. Lastly, the JMR noted Appellant's reports that, after service, he cried himself to sleep "every night for many years and still [does]," still has nightmares and flashbacks about the war, and he "smelled death and until this day [he] can still smell that horrible experience." Note: The term "approximately as likely as not" does not mean merely within the realm of medical possibility, but that the medical evidence for and against a conclusion is so evenly divided that it is as medically sound to find in favor of causation or worsening as it is to find against causation or worsening. The phrase "at least as likely as not" is not in conflict with Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776, 781-82 (2021), and use of this standard will be considered to be in full compliance with the Board's remand instructions. All opinions are to be accompanied by a rationale consistent with the evidence of record. A discussion of the pertinent evidence, relevant medical treatises, and generally accepted medical principles is requested. If the examiner cannot provide an opinion without resorting to speculation, the examiner is asked to please provide complete explanations stating why this is so. In so doing, the examiner is asked to explain whether any inability to provide a more definitive opinion is the result of a need for additional information, or that the examiner has exhausted the limits of current medical knowledge in providing an answer to that particular question. 2. Readjudicate the remanded claim. JONATHAN B. KRAMER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Jackman, Bridget 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.