Depression decisions — 2015

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) for scheduling a hearing before a member of the Board at the RO.

The Veteran's PTSD resulted in occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas prior to September 26, 2012. The Board finds that the criteria for a rating in excess of 70 percent have not been met.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not prevent him from obtaining and maintaining gainful employment, as evidenced by his continued work as a truck driver until at least February 2014. The Board denies the claim for total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service connected disorders.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination to assess the severity of his service-connected PTSD.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current diagnoses of PTSD and depressive disorder are related to service, specifically her reported military sexual trauma. As such, the claim for service connection is granted.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to properly adjudicate the Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD. The case is REMANDED for further action.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim of service connection for PTSD and granted service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, including depressive disorder. The Veteran is found to have a current diagnosis of PTSD based on new evidence received within one year of the May 2009 rating decision.

The case is being remanded due to deficiencies in the Board's analysis regarding the issue of entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU). The Veteran has been unemployed since February 2001 following a cerebrovascular accident, and his service-connected disabilities include degenerative changes of the lumbar spine. The Court found that the issue of TDIU was not properly before the Board at the time of the December 2013 decision.

The Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder, right knee arthritis, and joint disorder are not service-connected as there is no evidence of a nexus to his military service.

The Board found that the Veteran does not have an acquired psychiatric disorder due to any incident of his active duty service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and SSA disability determination records. The Veteran's claims for service connection are not yet decided.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain additional medical records and for a VA psychological examination to determine the nature and etiology of his psychiatric disorders.

The Board found that the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorders were not incurred in or related to service.

The Veteran's right knee disorder is found to be secondary to his service-connected left knee. The claim for TDIU is granted as it is supported by the evidence of record.

The Veteran's service-connected PTSD and duodenal ulcer do not preclude him from engaging in substantially gainful employment.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining service treatment records and VA/VAU electronic medical records. The Veteran's psychiatric disability is also to be evaluated by a VA examiner.

The Veteran's PTSD and depression are related to her military service, and the Board has granted service connection for these conditions.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD and depression, due to military sexual trauma, and herpes were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not establish a current disability or link between these conditions and service.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinions and a need for an examination with a psychiatrist.

The Veteran's claim for increased special monthly compensation based on the need for regular aid and attendance at a higher level of care has been denied as he does not meet the threshold requirements for any of the required levels of SMC.