BVA Case 23-527: Ptsd

A separate medical opinion completed by the same psychologist provided a negative nexus and stated that the [e]xaminer sees no evidence of [m]emory [l]oss.

The Board denied service connection for memory loss in September 2020,finding that the competent medical evidence of record did not show a current disability,R.

The August 2021 JMPR noted that the Board had failed to ensure that the duty to assist had been satisfied,as potentially relevant records from the Social Security Administration (SSA)remained outstanding.

Case:23-527 Page: 4 of 20 Filed:07/31/2024 On appeal,the veteran asserts that the Board erred when it failed to address his explicitly raised argument that the September 2019 VA mental disorders examination was inadequate because the examining psychologist failed to comply with the Board's May 2018 remand order.

The Secretary concedes that the Board failed to address this argument,thereby violating its duty to consider all issues explicitly raised by the veteran.

242,244 (2008) (holding that the Court has jurisdiction to review whether the Board erred in failing to consider theories reasonably raised by the record).

Upon remand,the Board must provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases that explicitly addresses the veteran's arguments regarding the adequacy of the September 2019 VA mental disorders examination and whether it complied with the Board's May 2018 remand instructions.

In May 2018,the Board noted that because the veteran's service audiograms showed a bilateral threshold shift of at least 10 decibels from enlistment to separation, remand was warranted so that the veteran could attend a VA examination to determine the nature,onset,and etiology of the hearing loss.