decision in two thousand and four or a decision of which dealt with issues involving compensation for a psychiatric disability the veterans of course held the like the conditions of grass in the  requirement the requirement for inextricably intertwined is based upon whether the disposition of one's life affect the disposition of the other life and the record in this case clearly demonstrates that these claims were these proceedings to the two thousand and four decision by monetary representative it was represented by the disabled american veterans and that's the importance of the record below this was in two thousand as i was just indicating both issues were before the board of the board only valid one but it went back to the agency after the plane for p t s d was found to be well grounded what happened was is that the agency decided only service connection for p t s d because the board deals but the second issue that is ignored to do that is of reopening and found that there is new material evidence that this is clearly mr brosnan's representative in two thousand and three the disabled american veterans did not consider this to be a final decision on his plea for compensation for psychiatric disability or today as the representatives would have taken and the no appeal was taken in two was the purpose of this in extract blander twined it isn't this usually to allow the court to postpone the action on something because it could be affected by the outcome or determination correct of another claim which is coming down the pike and so it's it's not supposed to grant you an opportunity to grant the veteran an opportunity to ignore a claim and ignore an appeal period in and then later try and rescue that with the extra complainer lined up but it seems like it's inexplicably intertwined has an entirely different purpose than what is being used for in this court in the joyce case describe the comparisons between whether as one claiming or it's two o'clock and ultimately concluded that in terms of this court's jurisdiction from the veterans court it doesn't matter and i submit to you that that same analysis applies between the board and its finality of decisions and the jurisdiction by the veterans court below and the question is if you're gonna correctly the v a decides is the appropriate way he believes that what took place in service is what it those instances are the manifestations of his current disability and isn't in intertwining switching a little bit gears a factual matter basis and underlying facts of one claim with another aren't you know you are i would suggest that it is a next question of fact in all of this has ultimately to do with the question of finality and finality it is and must be a the court decision that same analysis should be extended by this court in this case to the analysis between the board's decision making in the two decisions at which it made and the court concluded that  reviewed this or concluded joyce that the review of veterans court decisions as to a service connection claim is unavailable under elkins because it would disturb the orderly process of adjudication and we submit that the orderly knew as well that they were working their way through the system at a different pace and are we saying in this veteran benevolent and environment that the courts continually reminded about and if in fact when you say it's his decision and so he thinks about a new says well i had this now or definition of my psychiatric illness the what it's called has a different names and this is what the core group effort that says the field of mental disorders represents the greatest possible when affects and requires differential consideration rish in respects and in holding that proceedings based on new diagnosis of another facet of mental disability court or the decision maker however it's working is apparently precluded from considering the overall funky archaic environment and who better and might only be looking at this little piece which is now which wasn't mind and with psychiatric disorders can you only say well this only affects your hangnail and therefore the fact that you also have a stubbed toe these are separate whereas if it's what's going on in your mind it's very hard to to say you're only half a second it is half of the brain and half on the other half when when you put it together you might have a significant disability i think your honor that all of these things  obliged because the p t s d wasn't appealed on they now obliged to set aside and not consider any manifestations that one can say or related to instructions that when the questions are reasonably close down is resolved in favor of preference and that's what happened before yes fair that's correct and now i reckon this is as a matter i was taken by the comment we know that there are many very highly professional people who are not lawyers who are helping veterans no one has to wonder in fact how they can cope with all of these nuances without getting inside the judges and that they may get too many years down the road in being told what are you doing here and this seems to be just  congress was trying to avoid and you know that's why this court has permitted appeals in that circumstance as a matter of fact it was   to have to been in combat you have to be able to prove that a bomb went off next year or something like that there was no evidence of that in the record p t s d claim for a lack of an element poster and so it is very distinguished from this psychiatric disorder which does not require a combat stress or an additional element factor as directors you realize that what we've just done has made this at least a mix question of law in fact yes because we're we were back in to analyzing the elements of the claims as a part of the question of whether there are two liners or if you compare saw that took place as opposed to a combat related injury like a stretcher you have to have a stressor but it's a separate type but the board couldn't find that in the record but that's correct but that doesn't mean that he wasn't in total compensation on a left the question of relatedness the service in a claim for compensation that issue was not finally decided until the two thousand and four board decision mr broxton a representative from an authorized organization that native judgment that no appeal is necessary now mr gryce is being punished for that because he's being told there should have been and he well it is a judgment as to whether  and now we're punishing him and saying that now when you finally get your final decision you can't come into this court it's also unfair to talk about really because efren was in the context of a jurisdiction agency in such a way to implicate the jurisdiction of the veterans court that's precisely what happened here both of these issues of in title of the compensation for psychiatric disability were before the  or maybe one of decision that decision was not appeal because there was a real man because dylan material evidence was found to deal with the very elements that went to that fight in his service or back out he's getting mixed messages in a system which is supposed to be provocative and proactive to protect you mr brockton was not protected here he was not given the benefit of the jurisdiction of the veterans or to