New evidence question

[2NDMARDIVDOC]

Hello and thanks in advance. As some of you already know I've asked a few questions about my claim for overactive bladder. The back story is this. 

When I discharged back in 2002 one of my claims was overactive bladder. It was diagnosed in service and I was put on meds for it. On my discharge physical it is clearly outlined about the condition. However, the doctor that did the physical wrote "ncd" next to the condition. It wasn't until yesterday that I discovered it meant "not considered disabling" 

the VA denied my claim for the bladder because they claimed that the "Perpondence of evidence" was not in my favor. I never disputed the denial. Over the last several months my bladder condition has worsened and is well documented. 

I had found some "new" evidence from back in the service that I didn't think the VA had when they denied me. So I submitted that as well as all my recent urology records. 

My C&P was yesterday. The examiner was actually very nice and very thorough. She started digging through my original records that the VA had back in 2002. I noticed that the VA in fact DID have the records that I thought they didn't. 

Anyway, here's the questions  I submitted the reopening of the claim based on "new evidence" and requested a CUE  as it turns out, the only "new" evidence I submitted was the recent urology reports  

I did see where regional requested a medical opinion / nexus from the examiner . Is it accurate to think that if they were going to dismiss the "new" evidence that it would have never been granted a C&P exam??? 

Would the recent urology reports be seen as new evidence? Obviously they didn't exist when the claim was originally denied and the urology reports from the military had already been considered so in reality the only new evidence I actually submitted was the stuff from just the last 5 months. 

 

 

[MikeHunt]

37 minutes ago, 2NDMARDIVDOC said:

Mike, I'm new to the claims process

Me too, it seems everyday!!

To 'reopen' (a year after a claim's been denied) you need 'New' and 'Material' to reopen. Both these terms are used in their conventional meaning.

Example, as I understand it:

Denied for a current broken leg because of 'no event in service.'

I send in X-rays of my current broken leg- It would certainly be new, but not material to the reason they denied in the first place- No in service event- X-rays from today have no bearing on the fact that there wasn't anything in my service to do with broken legs. A little absurd, but hopefully illustrates the 'material' part.

Within a year of a denial, it's a reconsideration. You can just say 'look at this again, please' with what's already been submitted.

[2NDMARDIVDOC]

Got it. Thank you.