BVA Case 23-4881: Depression

In his initial brief,the appellant argued that in dismissing his claims,the Board failed to comply with the Court's January 2023 remand instructions and thus left his claims unresolved.

In a January 2018 rating decision,the RO continued to deny the claim for service connection for tremors due to Agent Orange exposure,on the basis that the evidence submitted was not new and material.

The Board found that the appellant was not diagnosed with Parkinson's or Parkinsonism disorder at any time duringthe appeal.

In July 2022,he filed a brief contending that though the Board determined that the evidence did not reflect a current diagnosis of Parkinsonism disorder,service connectionfor Parkinsonism on a presumptivebasis was proper, even without a formal diagnosis.

In the alternative,the appellant contended that his claims should be remanded because VA violated its statutory duty to assist him in developing his claim.

In a January 2023 memorandum decision,the Court vacated the October 2021 Board decision and remanded the matter,instructing the Board to determine [w]hether VA's duty to assist requires it to provide the appellant with an examination or opinion addressing whether his claimed tremors and disability manifested by memory problems are (a) related to his in-service Agent Orange exposure and are,or are,[sic]signs or manifestations of Parkinsonism;or (b)both related to Agent Orange exposure and are signs of manifestations of Parkinsonism.

Or,if the Board determines that VA's duty to assist does not require it to retrieve the private treatment records or provide such an examination or opinion,the Court will remand the matter for the Board to provide adequate reasons or bases for its determination.

The Board noted that this essentially recharacterized the claim for 4 Case:23-4881 Page: 5 of 10 Filed:01/30/2025 tremors and memory problems as entitlement to service connection for Parkinson's disease with mild neurocognitive disorder with unspecified depressive disorder.