Edison B. Locklear v. Eric K. Shinseki, 2011 U.S. Vet. App. LEXIS 291

Locklear appeals a Board decision denying an earlier effective date for TDIU prior to May 20, 1990, arguing the Board erred in deeming an earlier TDIU claim implicitly denied.
Early 1980s: VA denied multiple service-connection and disability claims for schizophrenia; decisions became final since not appealed.
May 1983 Board referred TDIU and nonservice-connected pension issues to the RO but did not adjudicate TDIU at that time.
1986 and 1987 Board decisions denied increased schizophrenia ratings; these decisions did not address TDIU or include an SOC on TDIU.
In 1991, Locklear received a 100% schedular rating effective May 20, 1990; prior TDIU claims remained unadjudicated.
The 2009 Board found that prior decisions implicitly denied TDIU, which the court reverses and remands for development.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether prior bifurcated adjudications implicitly denied TDIU	Locklear argues explicit separation precludes implicit denial.	Secretary contends prior denials implicitly denied TDIU once schedular ratings were adjudicated.	Implicit denial not shown; reversal remand required.
Whether notice was sufficient to imply denial of TDIU after bifurcation	No SOC or decision addressed TDIU after bifurcation, so no implicit denial notice.	Notice via discussion of industrial impairment could imply TDIU denial.	Not sufficient notice; Board erred; remand authorized for further development.

Adams v. Nicholson, 568 F.3d 961 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (implicit denial rule is a notice provision; requires sufficient notice)