Caring. Effective. Efficient.

BVA Mischaracterized Appeal as Claim to Reopen

BVA Mischaracterized Appeal as Claim to Reopen

The BVA decision in this case mischaracterized the veteran's traditional appeal as a claim to reopen.  The BVA Judge  found that the veteran's  service connection claim for his left ankle disorder and bilateral pes planus were not reopened because new and material evidence had not been received to reopen the claims.

The problem with the decision was that the procedural posture of the case had nothing to do with reopened claims. This case is an example of a common problem with the BVA - they simply don't look at the claim to understand its procedural posture.  Here's the actual procedural posture of the veteran's claim:

July 2013: VA Rating Decision denying bilateral pes planus and left ankle condition claims.

December 3, 2013: Veteran disagrees with the VA Rating Decision and asks for an immediate appeal due to financial hardship.

July 2014: VA Rating Decision confirmed and continued the denial, but decided to call the claims "reconsideration claims", whatever that is (no such procedure or nomenclature exists in the VA appeals process).

September 2014: Veteran filed a Notice of Disagreement to the July 2014 VA Rating Decision

VA certified the appeal to the BVA, and BVA Remanded to issue a Statement of Case (SOC)

September 2015: SOC was issued, but did not characterize the claim as a claim to reopen

February 2016: BVA denies "claim to reopen" on grounds that there was not new and material evidence to reopen the claim.

The remand order in this case directs the BVA to readjudicate the appeal as what it is - an appeal of a July 2013 VA Ratings Decision - rather than what the BVA pretended it is (a claim to reopen).

Does this case sound like your VA Rating Decision or BVA Decision? If so, click here to have  Attig | Steel take a look at your case.

Link to the BVA Decision on CAVC Website.

Link to the Joint Motion to Remand the CAVC Website.

Case Details

OGC Attorney: Abigail J. Schopick

Veteran Representation at CAVC: Chris Attig (link to bio)

Board of Veterans Appeals Veterans Law Judge: S.L. Kennedy

Regional Office: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania VA Regional Office

Vets’ Rep at BVA: American Legion 

Date of BVA Decision: May 6, 2016

Date of CAVC Judgment on Remand: February 24, 2017

Taking Point! Blog

Oct
26
If you are an agent, VSO, or attorney, you have a tough decision under AMA when the BVA issues a denial of your client’s benefits. On one hand, you can file a supplemental claim. On the other, you can file an appeal to the US Court of Ap… Read More
Jun
3
I really can’t take it anymore. I’m sure many like you feel the same way. Every time another child with a military weapon ambushes a school full of children, I am overwhelmed with emotions that have no outlet. I can’t even process… Read More
May
27
  While on our way to the nutcracker audition at the local theatre I asked my 9-year-old daughter how her day went at school. “It was okay.  We had another active shooter drill.  When the drill started, I had to run behind and under my teacher… Read More
May
23
After years of exploring different fields, I’ve found purpose-driven work here, at Attig | Curran | Steel.   There are a lot of variables in the experience of “happy.” It is difficult to keep it continuous.  Do I feel happy when my kids… Read More

Read the "Taking Point!" Blog

Recent Cases

This case involves the BVA judge’s inadequate reasoning of a denial of a veteran’s claim for an increased rating for PTSD.   The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand. ISSUE ON APPEAL TO THE CAVC (BVA overlooked evidence… Read More
This case involves the BVA judge’s inadequate reasoning of his denial of a veteran’s past-due benefits in a claim for an increased rating due to an increase in the severity of the veteran’s PTSD. The appeal was resolved through a jo… Read More
This case involves the BVA’s failure to comply with a Veterans Court Order in a January 2020 Memorandum Decision. The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand. ISSUE ON APPEAL TO THE CAVC (BVA fails to comply with Veterans Court Ord… Read More

See More Appellate Results