16-19 202, 16-19 202

Veteran served in the Navy (Apr 1998–Mar 2000) and appealed VA RO rating decisions from Aug 2015 challenging: (1) initial 70% rating for panic disorder with anxiety, sleep disturbance, and depression, and (2) initial 0% rating for allergic rhinitis.
Board remanded and there was subsequent development; Board found substantial compliance with remand and proceeded to decide the two claims.
Panic disorder was rated under DC 9412 (70% initially); Veteran sought a 100% rating effective from the claim date (Dec 9, 2013).
Allergic rhinitis was rated under DC 6522 (0% initially); claimant sought a compensable rating effective from claim date (Oct 25, 2014).
VA medical exams, treatment records, lay statements, and a mental-health symptom checklist were the main evidence considered.
Board concluded VA satisfied VCAA and duty to assist; no additional outstanding obtainable evidence was identified.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether panic disorder merits an initial rating >70% (i.e., 100%)	Veteran asserts symptoms (including reports of delusions/hallucinations, memory problems) justify total occupational/social impairment (100%).	VA argues record lacks symptoms listed for 100% (gross thought impairment, persistent delusions/hallucinations, disorientation, memory loss of close relatives/own name, danger to self/others).	Denied — evidence does not show the level of impairment required for 100%; 70% rating upheld.
Whether allergic rhinitis warrants an initial compensable rating (>0%)	Veteran contends rhinitis causes obstructive symptoms warranting at least a 10% rating.	VA contends exams and imaging show no >50% bilateral obstruction, no complete unilateral obstruction, and no polyps, so only 0% is appropriate.	Denied — record shows no requisite obstruction or polyps for a compensable rating; 0% rating upheld.

Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (procedural remand/SOC requirements)
Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (remand requires compliance with Board instructions)
D'Aries v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 97 (substantial compliance standard)
Mauerhan v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 436 (symptom examples under §4.130 are illustrative; need showing of listed or similar symptoms)
Vazquez-Claudio v. Shinseki, 713 F.3d 112 (must demonstrate symptoms corresponding to rating criteria)
Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (preponderance of evidence/benefit of the doubt standard)
Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 366 (extraschedular referral standard)