17-05 237, 17-05 237

Veteran served in Philippine guerrilla and combination service Nov 1945–Feb 1946; VA Regional Office (Manila) granted service connection for PTSD in Aug 2015.
RO initially assigned an effective date of March 11, 2015; Veteran filed a Notice of Disagreement seeking an earlier effective date (July 2014).
An Oct 2016 Decision Review Officer assigned an effective date of August 11, 2014; SOC in Nov 2016 continued that effective date.
Veteran argues the claim was filed (signed) July 28, 2014; VA records show receipt of the statement on Aug 11, 2014 (timestamp on scanned document).
Board found no evidence of any earlier informal or formal claim for a mental health disability before Aug 11, 2014 and declined to disturb the RO effective date.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the effective date for service‑connected PTSD should be earlier than Aug 11, 2014	Veteran: signed statement July 28, 2014 shows claim filed in July 2014, so effective date should be in July 2014	VA: effective date is the date VA received the claim (Aug 11, 2014); no evidence VA received it in July; presumption of regularity not rebutted	Denied: effective date prior to Aug 11, 2014 not warranted; Aug 11, 2014 is the proper effective date

Dingess v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473 (explaining § 5103(a) notice is not required for downstream issues after a claim is substantiated)
Hartman v. Nicholson, 483 F.3d 1311 (same principle on downstream questions and notice)
Rodriguez v. West, 189 F.3d 1351 (definition and treatment of informal/formal claims)
Hodge v. West, 155 F.3d 1356 (duty to sympathetically develop veteran's claims)
Roberson v. West, 251 F.3d 1378 (VA must determine all potential claims raised by evidence)
Szemraj v. Principi, 357 F.3d 1370 (sympathetic reading of pro se filings required)