BVA Case 21-3087: Depression

The matter 3 returned to the Board in April 2009,and the Board denied the appellant's claim for benefits for a low back disability.

The Board also determined that the appellant had submitted new and material evidence and therefore reopened the claim for benefits for a low back disability and remanded the claim for further development.

5 In the January 2021 decision on appeal, the Board denied entitlement to benefits for a low back disability and to an effective date earlier than January 13,2016,for TDIU.

He next argues that the Board erred in finding him not credible with respect to the circumstances surrounding his claimed back injury because the Board relied on the absence of contemporaneous medical evidence, id.

The appellant also briefly asserts that the Board erred in relying on his Board hearing testimony to discredit him because the Board fail[ed]to consider the fact that [he]used a translator during the hearing and there was a language barrier.

Turning to the issue of TDIU,the appellant asserts that the Board failed to consider his complete disability picture, instead of focusing on whether each of his service-connected disabilities,individually,resulted in unemployability.

Next,the appellant argues that the Board erred by finding that a non-service-connected disability � his low back condition � was responsible for his unemployability because the Board failed to consider whether his service-connected conditions also rendered him unemployable during the period in question.

In that regard,the 6 Secretary agrees that the Board failed to address the combined effects of the appellant's service- connected disabilities and overlooked relevant evidence, specifically the October 2008 VA examination report and the May 2010 VA examination report.