Michael Velez v. Eric K. Shinseki

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that, in the context of reopening, a claim for a nervous condition was not a new claim based on a distinctly diagnosed condition from a previously adjudicated claim for a stress disorder
• holding that, in the context of reopening, a claim for a 14 nervous condition was not a new claim based on a distinctly diagnosed condition from a previously adjudicated claim for a stress disorder
• interpreting the holding in Clemons in the context of a new and material evidence determination where the RO was found to have considered \any diagnosed psychiatric condition that could be related to service\
• on direct appeals to the Board, theories of substantive entitlement to benefits such as direct and secondary service connection are not independent for res judicata purposes, and can be lost forever if not addressed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).