I found out were it all started

[Mr cue]

Ok I am just posting again to show ppl the error that can happen after a cavc remand.

Here is the court remand it reverse and set a side the effective that were granted By bva Jan 30 2018

Here is the bva remand to ro.

The bva told ro to granted the same effective dates from the bva decision Jan 30 2018.

the court set a side. Not legal

Now I am in the new appeal lane for this issue with a July 2021 appeal date.smh to hold for years

The court reverse the adjustment disorder

The board remand it and stated it can only be return to the board if I do the va form 9. Starting a new appeal.

We're did the cavc remand stated to do all this. It reverse there decision.

 

I am now 102000 on the docket for this issue and be told I am waiting on a video hearing. I never requested one. Smh to hold years

This is why i have a petition for extraordinary relief at the court. 

I see to many cavc remand case talk about 3 for 4 years to a decision.

When we all understand a cavc remand is return to the board front of the line.

You never have to start the whole appeal process over. Smh

 

Upon consideration of the foregoing, the portion of the January 30, 2020, Board decision

finding that Mr October 2018 NOD did not encompass that portion of the July 5, 2018,

rating decision granting a 70% evaluation, but no higher, for a psychiatric disorder is REVERSED

and the matter is REMANDED for further adjudication; the portions of the January 30, 2020,

Board decision denying an effective date before May 9, 2018, for the grant of SMC and entitlement

to SMC in excess of the housebound rate, from May 9 to July 17, 2018, and at the aid-and-

attendance rate from that point are SET ASIDE and the matters are REMANDED for further

development, if necessary, and readjudication consistent with this decision; and the balance of the appeal is dismiss.

Now look at the bva remand.

I really think the court is going to trip when they see this. The court doesn't Grant many reversal.

I am just venting again

 because the va send me the may 3 remand  and all the other decision made after the cavc remand yesterday. Can understand why but happy they did. It made me look the bva remand over again.

And I can really see were there errors started now

 

 

 

 

 

[john999]

Do you have a lawyer?

[broncovet]

John, Im pretty sure Mr. Cue is pro se at the CAVC, if I recall he had one or more disputes with his attorney(s).  Like yourself I recommended an attorney especially at the CAVC, since EAJA pays the attorney fees at the CAVC level.  

Mr. Cue posted:

Quote

Here is the bva remand to ro.

The bva told ro to granted the same effective dates from the bva decision Jan 30 2018.

the court set a side. Not legal

Im unable to understand what this means.  In a "remand", the court does not specify an effective date, but gives the lower court discretion on the effective date "because" this gives the claimant an opportunity (if the claimant so chooses) to submit "new evidence".   If the Veteran submits new evidence, that evidence will be considered to have been filed at the beginning of the appeal period as in 38 CFR 3.156 B:

Quote

(b) Pending legacy claims not under the modernized review system.New and material evidence received prior to the expiration of the appeal period, or prior to the appellate decision if a timely appeal has been filed (including evidence received prior to an appellate decision and referred to the agency of original jurisdiction by the Board of Veterans Appeals without consideration in that decision in accordance with the provisions of § 20.1304(b)(1) of this chapter), will be considered as having been filed in connection with the claim which was pending at the beginning of the appeal period.

Upon remand, the claimant is given an opportunity to submit new evidence which could benefit the claimant.  This is why the CAVC generally does not supply effective dates, they have no idea if the claimant will take advantage of this and get an IMO/IME, for example, suggesting the claimant had symptoms of the disorder prior to the dates currently on record.  

The court is unlikely going to put itself into a position where they have to "predict", with accuracy, whether or not you will take advantage of 38CFR 3.156 b and they especially dont want to predict what an IMO/IME doc would render as an opinion regarding when symptoms began which would affect the effective date.  

SMC effective dates should be the date the symptoms appeared, not the claim date.  

 

Edited August 29, 2021 by broncovet

[Mr cue]

Well yes I am pro se 

I never had a lawyer 

Ok the court cant vacated a granted of benfits 

So they set them a side. Which mean the bva has to address the other time periods. Not the period they granted on the decision I appeal.

Ok everybody understand cavc remand are to be expidate and if remand by bva is to be return to front of line at bva it's the law

You are not to start the whole appeal process over.

I am now 100000 on the docket my case is not been return to BVA in the front of line.

Which mean the bva is not following the law and is causing undo delay by make me start a whole new appeal process

 

It more but that it in a nutshell

 

 

[pwrslm]

Make an IG complaint. If you feel they are not following the law, the IG may take up the issue on advancing your remand like you stated. The VBA and BVA are both obligated to follow the law.  Be prepared to cite the law, and find precedent as evidence. This is normally done via lawyers, but you are pro-ce.

Or you could work with a VSO who can investigate and correct errors that the VBA and BVA make. VSO's have a much easier time communicating w/both and tend to get answers much faster than us lone claimants. Maybe think about a limited power of attorney that will protect you from the VSO screwing things up. 

If there is a way to screw up, murphy's law applies. That is what lawyers were made for. CAVC level law is fairly complex, so be careful.

Edited August 30, 2021 by pwrslm