CAVC Case 22-3160: PTSD
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2022-02-03 · PIETSCH, Judge
This is a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims — the federal court that reviews Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions, one level above the Board. Court decisions can vacate, reverse, or affirm what the Board did.
Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.
Dependent add-ons start at a 30% rating. Child-only and dependent-parent rates: see the full 2026 pay chart.
2026 base rates, all ratings (veteran alone)
| Rating | Monthly (2026, incl. 2.8% COLA) |
|---|---|
| 10% | $180.42 |
| 20% | $356.66 |
| 30% | $552.47 |
| 40% | $795.84 |
| 50% | $1,132.90 |
| 60% | $1,435.02 |
| 70% | $1,808.45 |
| 80% | $2,102.15 |
| 90% | $2,362.30 |
| 100% | $3,938.58 |
Conditions Claimed
PTSDPsychiatricHearing LossTinnitusHeartTDIU
Referral disclosure: VetAid earns a referral fee if you become a paying REE Medical client through this link — it helps keep this site free. REE Medical provides paid medical evidence; it is not a law firm, VSO, or claims agent, and VetAid has not independently verified its services. VSOs and VA-accredited representatives will help you file your claim at no cost, and no one can guarantee a rating increase.
Issues on Appeal
Service ConnectionEffective DateTDIUIncreased RatingDicHearing LossPTSD
Why It Was Decided This Way
In an April 2019 decision, the Board denied entitlement to an effective date earlier than August 17,2011,for the grant of TDIU for accrued-benefits purposes.
In the February 3,2022,decision,the Board denied the claim for entitlement to an effective date earlier than August 17, 2011,for the grant of a TDIU for accrued-benefits purposes.
The Board found that prior to August 17,2011, the competent and credible evidence of record is not in approximate balance but instead,persuasively establishes that the Veteran [was] not precluded from securing or following substantially gainful employment due to his service- connected disabilities.
The Board found that the veteran could perform a job in an office environment that involves individual computer work, including writing or paperwork specifically based on his educational background which includes four years of college.
In addition,the Board found that the Veteran could also have performed any job that primarily involved working alone, rather than collaboratively,including data entry,quality control,packaging,or serving as a surveillance monitor.
Still,the Board found that the veteran could perform certain types of physical employment with minimal communication with others,such as painting, R.
To satisfy this requirement,the Board must account for evidence it finds persuasive or unpersuasive,analyze the credibility and probative value of relevant evidence,and provide reasons for rejecting any evidence favorable to appellant.
According to the appellant, [a]lthough she does not agree with the adverse findings that the Board made to resolve disputes of fact,she is not here challenging any adverse factual findings as being clearly erroneous.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|Inadequate Exam
Find Similar Decisions for Your Claim
VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.
Run my claim through VetAid →