Ok here is the whole decision on smc s and l

[Mr cue]

I have posted the cavc set a side order.

This the bva decision after the remand.

Now the bva has only address the period from when I apply for smc.

I got denied housebound by fact for the same reason as Howell v Nicholson.

Because I was able to travel to medical appointments. Smh 

Guess the bva judge never read Howell v Nicholson.

Not one piece of my evidence before 2018 was even address in this bva decision.

Then the crazy part in the history they just run my disability together.

They never address that the buffalo ny regional never cretifed my appeal in 1993.

The court allow the the va to stage rate me from 1993-2001 20% for neck. 20%elbow/hand.

I was give extra schedulers tdiu from 1993-2001.

Because I was granted tdiu 2001 based on the neck 60%pt. And have never work since service.

all done to not address my smc in the proper light.

Well the last thing they remove this issue from the cavc remand docket and legacy appeal system.

An put me in the new ama system I never opt in.

Now I get a decision on my cavc remand tell me I can request a supplement review.

And I have a new 2021 docket number for a appeal that start 2018.

Well I will win the smc s they just kill there self by denied it because I can go to doctor appointments.

I will win the effective dates once the court address there errors.

Guys confine to one home is not been able to leave your home to make a income.

That the law under Howell v Nicholson.

 

 

 

 

[Mr cue]

59 minutes ago, broncovet said:

The question of "whether or not" you have been able to leave your home to make an income, unfortunately, is a "judgement call" made by a decision maker based on "the decision maker's interpretation" of the evidence.  Its not based "solely upon the opinion's of the Veteran."  

Yes, that is the law.  We dont adjuticate our own cases, people paid to judge make these judgement calls.  *judges, rating specialists, etc.

    And, the Supreme Court gives VA "much latitude in the interpretation" of their own regulations, in Chevron, often called "Chevron Deference

 

[Mr cue]

Listen I don't understand your purpose of put that everbody need a imo.

I think we understand that is the only way you see things.

An there is nothing wrong with that.

But to try an tell a veteran the va can interpret the law the way they want is doing a dis service.

You don't even understand my case.

But you want to put the same info you put on everbody post.

Are you just copy the same info over and over on every one post.

You need a imo. Smh