PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2015

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination and additional evidence. The claim will be reconsidered based on the new information.

The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn due to the appellant requesting a withdrawal of this appeal.

The Veteran's acquired psychiatric disability, including PTSD and mood disorder, is granted as a result of service connection due to the in-service assault he experienced while on active duty. The Board also found that his current mood disorder is secondary to his service-connected low back and carpal tunnel disabilities.

The Veteran is seeking service connection for a psychiatric disorder, including PTSD and depression. The Board has determined that additional development is needed to ascertain the facts surrounding his inservice motorcycle accident of April 7, 1987.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals has remanded the case for additional development due to insufficient explanation in a previous VA examiner's opinion regarding the Veteran's claimed PTSD stressors and the adequacy of the medical opinion in compliance with DSM-IV.

The Board found no evidence of a service connection for PTSD or Bipolar Disorder with Psychotic Features, as the Veteran's symptoms were not shown to be related to his military service.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for PTSD was granted, with a disability rating of 50 percent. The effective date remains unchanged at the date of the grant of service connection on August 23, 2010.

The Veteran's combined disability rating prior to March 18, 2014 was 70 percent. As of March 18, 2014, his combined disability rating is 80 percent with a single disability rated at 60 percent. The Board finds that the Veteran meets the schedular criteria for consideration for TDIU and grants entitlement to TDIU.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's PTSD is as likely as not attributable to service, and therefore grants the claim for service connection.

The Veteran's service-connected PTSD and chronic tonsillitis do not prevent him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation.

The Veteran's appeal of the TDIU issue has been remanded due to incomplete development and the need for additional notice and evidence. The case will be returned to the Board after further action.

The Veteran's PTSD with mild depressive features was initially rated at 10 percent prior to November 17, 2010. After a VA examination and review of his treatment records, the rating was increased to 50 percent effective from November 17, 2010.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and clarifying the Veteran's service stressors. The Veteran is seeking service connection for a psychiatric disorder, which may include PTSD, depression, or dysthymia, based on in-service personal assault.

The Veteran's claims for PTSD and peripheral neuropathy of both hands and feet are being remanded due to the need for additional examinations and clarification of medical diagnoses.

The Veteran's claim for an effective date earlier than February 23, 2009 for service connection of PTSD was denied. The initial rating for PTSD prior to March 31, 2014 and a higher rating thereafter were also denied.

The Veteran's PTSD with depressive disorder is currently rated at 50 percent, which does not meet the criteria for a higher rating as his symptoms do not warrant a more severe disability evaluation.

The Veteran's PTSD produces occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity, warranting a 50 percent disability rating.

The Veteran's PTSD symptoms prior to November 19, 2013 did not result in total occupational and social impairment. Since then, they have resulted in such impairment.

The Board found that the Appellant was entitled to attorney fees for representation of the Veteran regarding the issue of Individual Unemployability (TDIU) for posttraumatic stress disorder, as the NOD filed in August 2011 was valid and the Appellant did perform legal services on behalf of the Veteran.

The Veteran's appeal has been dismissed due to his death. The Board does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this appeal.