## Facts

- James L. Deshotel, a U.S. Army veteran (active duty Oct. 1965–May 1969), suffered head trauma and orthopedic injuries in an in-service car accident.
- In 1969, VA granted service connection for a shoulder injury but did not grant service connection for head-injury residuals; no psychiatric claim was asserted as part of the 1969 filing.
- In July 1984, Deshotel sought to reopen a head-injury claim.
- In January 1985, after a VA examination that included a psychiatric component, the VA Regional Office (RO) granted service connection for “status post head trauma with post traumatic headaches” (10%) and noted the exam showed no psychiatric symptomatology; the RO did not separately award service connection for any psychiatric condition.
- Deshotel did not appeal the January 1985 rating decision, which became final.
- In August 1999, Deshotel sought benefits for “memory loss and depression” due to head/brain disease; VA later granted service connection for a psychiatric disability with an effective date of August 1999.
- Deshotel sought an earlier effective date (to 1984), alleging the 1985 RO decision contained clear and unmistakable error (CUE) by not granting service connection for a psychiatric disorder.
- The Board of Veterans’ Appeals found no CUE; the Veterans Court dismissed Deshotel’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction; Deshotel appealed to the Federal Circuit.

## Issues

1. Whether the Veterans Court properly dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction given the finality of the 1985 RO decision and the Board’s no-CUE determination.
2. Whether, when an RO grants service connection for a primary disability but is silent on a related, reasonably raised theory (psychiatric disability associated with head trauma), the related claim remains pending or is implicitly denied by the RO decision.

## Decision

- The Federal Circuit affirmed the Veterans Court’s dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
- The court held the 1985 RO decision implicitly denied service connection for any psychiatric disability associated with the head injury.
- Because the 1985 rating decision became final when not appealed, the only available method to revise it was a successful CUE challenge, which the Board had rejected.

## Legal Principles

- A VA rating decision may implicitly deny a related claim when, viewed objectively, it would notify a reasonable claimant that the related benefit was considered and rejected, even if not expressly listed as denied.
- When an RO decision becomes final, a claimant cannot obtain an earlier effective date by later characterizing the unawarded related benefit as “pending”; revision generally requires establishing CUE in the final decision.
- The Veterans Court’s jurisdiction does not extend to re-adjudicating the merits of a final RO decision absent a proper legal basis such as CUE; appellate review is confined to reviewable legal questions rather than reweighing evidence.

## Conclusion

The Federal Circuit treated the 1985 RO decision as an implicit denial of any psychiatric claim linked to the service-connected head trauma; because that decision became final, Deshotel could not obtain an earlier effective date without proving CUE, and the Veterans Court properly dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.


Deshotel v. Nicholson, 457 F.3d 1258 (Fed. Cir. 2006)