matters regarding the issue on appeal.”); Brannon v. West, 12 Vet.App. 32, 35 (1998) (concluding that the Board must “adjudicate all issues reasonably raised by a liberal reading of the appellant’s substantive appeal including all documents and oral testimony in the record prior to the Board’s decision”). Nonetheless, in addressing those theories, the Court has held that the Board is not required to discuss all of the evidence of record but rather it must discuss the relevant evidence. Dela Cruz v. Principi 15 Vet.App. 143, 149 (2001); see also Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 589, 593 (1991) (Board must discuss, inter alia, all relevant evidence). The Court’s caselaw in this regard has been affirmed by the Federal Circuit. See Gonzales v. West, 218 F.3d 1378, 1380-81 (Fed.Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). Even very recently the Federal Circuit
holding that absent specific evidence indicating otherwise va is presumed to have reviewed all evidence in the record when making a determination as to service connection holding that there was no new and material evidence to reopen claim where newly presented evidence was not accompanied by any medical evidence indicating a nexus to service holding error in admission of evidence is harmless when it was merely cumulative to other evidence in the record holding that absent evidence to the contrary court proceedings are presumed to be procedurally proper holding that new evidence is evidence not previously of record and not merely cumulative of other evidence