Blubaugh v. McDonald, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 23110

Blubaugh served in Vietnam 1965; filed for service connection for PTSD in 1988; VA denied in 1989 based on no PTSD diagnosis. 1989 decision became final.
In 1992 Blubaugh asked to reopen; VA associated a DA Form 20 (specific Vietnam service dates) with his file, reopened and again denied in 1993 for lack of PTSD diagnosis and no confirmable stressor; that decision became final.
On July 25, 2008 Blubaugh filed another reopening request, submitting medical records diagnosing PTSD and a statement describing combat stressors; VA granted service connection and assigned a 10% rating effective July 25, 2008.
Blubaugh sought an earlier effective date (arguing June 9, 1993); VA and the Board held the effective date is the 2008 reopening because earlier claims lacked a diagnosis and confirmable stressor.
Blubaugh argued the VA should have applied 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(c) to assign an earlier effective date because the DA Form 20 had been newly associated with his file before the 1993 decision; the Veterans Court held § 3.156(c) did not apply and affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(c) requires VA to assign an earlier effective date when service records were later associated with the claims file	Blubaugh: § 3.156(c) mandates retrospective effective-date consideration when VA later grants benefits and relevant service records were not associated at the time of earlier decision	VA: § 3.156(c) only requires reconsideration of merits when records are newly associated; subsections (c)(3)/(c)(4) on effective dates apply only if reconsideration yields an award based on those records	Court: § 3.156(c) does not entitle Blubaugh to an earlier effective date because the DA Form 20 had been considered in 1993 and did not lead to an award; the 2008 award rested on new medical evidence, not the service record
Proper effective date for award based on reopened claim	Blubaugh: entitlement arose earlier (1993) because he had PTSD earlier and would have benefited from earlier treatment	VA: Under 38 U.S.C. § 5110 and implementing rule 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(r), effective date for reopened claim is date of receipt of reopening (or date entitlement arose, whichever is later); here July 25, 2008	Court: Applied § 3.400(r); effective date is July 25, 2008 because earlier claims lacked diagnosis/confirmable stressor and the 2008 claim presented new and material medical evidence

Cushman v. Shinseki, 576 F.3d 1290 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (standard of review for Veterans Court legal determinations; de novo review)
Akers v. Shinseki, 673 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (statutory framework for effective dates under 38 U.S.C. § 5110)