Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorder, mood disorder, unspecified depressive disorder, and persistent depressive…

Citation Nr: A26069939 Decision Date: 07/30/26 Archive Date: 07/30/26 DOCKET NO. 260217-631484 DATE: July 30, 2026 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorder, mood disorder, unspecified depressive disorder, and persistent depressive disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from April 1969 to April 1971. The claim on appeal was remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) in December 2024. In January 2026, the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) issued a rating decision denying the claim. In the February 2026 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Hearing docket. A Board hearing was held in March 2026. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the January 2026 AOJ decision on appeal, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran or his representative at the hearing or within 90 days following the hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.302(a). If evidence was submitted either (1) during the period after the AOJ issued the decision on appeal and prior to the Board hearing, or (2) more than 90 days following the hearing, the Board did not consider it in its decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.302(a), 20.801. However, because the Board is remanding the claim, any evidence the Board could not consider will be considered by the AOJ in the adjudication of the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(c)(2)(ii). Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorder, mood disorder, unspecified depressive disorder, and persistent depressive disorder is remanded. The Veteran initially sought service connection for PTSD related to several stressors during active service. As the medical evidence of record indicates that in the past, the Veteran has received multiple psychiatric diagnoses, the issue of entitlement to service connection for PTSD was expanded as noted above to encompass all psychiatric conditions diagnosed during the pendency of the appeal. See Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009). This matter was before the Board in December 2024 when it was remanded for further development. Specifically, the claim was remanded to (1) attempt to corroborate the Veteran's reported stressors, and (2) obtain a medical opinion which not only addressed the etiology of the Veteran's PTSD, but also the etiology of all other psychiatric conditions diagnosed during the appellate period. The Board notes that efforts were taken to corroborate the Veteran's reported stressors; however, such attempts were unsuccessful. See Final Attempt Letters, dated December 2025 and January 2026. Additionally, a VA medical examination and opinion were obtained in July 2025. Despite documented diagnoses of anxiety disorder, mood disorder, unspecified depressive disorder, and persistent depressive disorder in the record, the examiner indicated that the Veteran did not have a diagnosis of a mental disorder. Accordingly, the examiner offered no opinion as to whether the Veteran's anxiety disorder, mood disorder, unspecified depressive disorder, or persistent depressive disorder were related to service. Under the AMA, the Board must remand to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) to correct pre-decisional duty to assist errors (including when the AOJ failed to obtain a VA examination or provided an inadequate VA examination or opinion). 38 C.F.R. § 20.802(a). Here, the Board finds the July 2025 examination and opinion to be inadequate as the examiner's findings contradict the evidence of record, and the examiner failed to reconcile such findings with the competent medical evidence documenting diagnoses of several psychiatric conditions. The Board finds that the failure to obtain an adequate medical opinion is a pre-decisional duty to assist error requiring remand. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination with an appropriate psychologist or psychiatrist to determine the nature and likely etiology of his psychiatric disability. The examiner should provide an opinion that responds to the following: (Continued on the next page) ? a.) Please identify (by diagnosis) each psychiatric disability entity found. If no psychiatric disability is diagnosed, reconcile such finding with the fact that the Veteran has VA psychiatric treatment and has been assigned various psychiatric diagnoses. b.) For any psychiatric disability diagnosed, please indicate whether such is at least as likely as not had its onset inservice or is otherwise related to the Veteran's active service. Marcus N. Fulton Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Marsh II, Counsel The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.