BVA Case 20-4504: Ptsd

PIETSCH, Judge :The appellant,Robert Rentfrow, through counsel,appeals a March 5, 2020,Board of Veteran's Appeals (Board)decision in which the Board denied (1)a disability rating in excess of 10%,effective before November 14,2019,for lumbar hypertrophic arthropathy with disc desiccation-protrusion and thoracolumbar muscle strain;and (2)a rating in excess of 40%for this disorder effective from November 14,2019.

In addition,the Board denied an initial rating in excess of 10%for ulnar calcific tendonitis of the right wrist as well as entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) before November 18,2019.

In addition, in his principal brief the appellant did not address the issue of entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 70%for major depressive disorder effective from November 18,2019,presumably abandoning the issue.

In the March 2020 decision,the Board determined that for the period before November 14, 2019,the criteria for a rating in excess of 10% for lumbar hypertrophic arthropathy with disc desiccation-protrusion and thoracolumbar muscle strain had not been met.

In addition,the Board denied an initial rating in excess of 50%for the appellant's service-connected major depressive disorder for the period before November 18,2019,and further denied a rating in excess of 70%for the disorder effective from November 18,2019.

Finally, the Board determined that for the period before November 18,2019,the criteria for entitlement to TDIU were not met.

Whether a medical [examination or]opinion is adequate is a finding of fact,which the Court reviews under the 'clearly erroneous'standard.

A finding of fact is clearly erroneous when the Court,after reviewing the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.