Back / lumbar spine decisions — 2007

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for her service-connected lower back disability is being remanded due to procedural defects in the VCAA notice and because a more contemporaneous VA examination is needed.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain additional VA treatment records and to schedule him for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his low back condition.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a back condition, hearing loss in the right ear, and tinnitus due to lack of evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for a back disorder due to new evidence linking it to an in-service fall. However, the medical evidence does not support a finding that this condition is related to his service-connected left heel fracture or any other service event.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for right knee scars and a back disorder, finding no new and material evidence to reopen his claim. The COPD rating was also denied.

The Board has remanded the claims for further development due to incomplete service records and the need for additional medical examinations.

The Board has reopened the veteran's service connection claim for herniated intervertebral disc at L4-5 and L5-S1, and finds that his current lower back disability is linked to service. The Board also grants service connection for degenerative disc disease of the lumbosacral spine.

The Board found no current diagnosis of a low back disorder and denied the veteran's claim for service connection.

The veteran's low back disorder was evaluated at a 20 percent rating prior to October 21, 2001. After this date, the RO assigned a 40 percent rating for intervertebral disc disease with severe recurring attacks and intermittent relief.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate reasons and bases for its findings and conclusions on all material issues of fact and law presented. A current VA neurological examination is needed, and proper notice under Dingess v. Nicholson must be provided.

The veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 40 percent for herniated disc of the lumbar spine with nerve impingement was denied by the RO, and his appeal is now being remanded to the RO.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected disabilities do not render him unemployable, as he is capable of performing light physical activities and can engage in sedentary employment.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected low back injury, finding that prior to May 21, 2003, he did not exhibit more than slight limitation of motion. From May 21, 2003, he exhibited muscle spasm on extreme forward bending and loss of lateral spine motion in the standing position.

The veteran's claims for increased rating, service connection for bilateral leg and knee pain, and back pain were denied. The Board found no evidence of a current disability related to his active duty service or service-connected conditions.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his lumbar spine disability, chronic eye disability, and right epididymal cyst. The lumbar spine disability was rated at 10 percent, the chronic eye disability at 10 percent, and the right epididymal cyst did not warrant a higher rating.

The Board has determined that the veteran's cervical spine disability, including cervical strain, degenerative disc disease of the cervical spine, and degenerative joint disease of the cervical spine, was incurred during active duty service.

The Board found no medical evidence to support a direct service connection for the veteran's low back disability, and thus denied his claim.

The veteran's claims for low back disability, skin cancer in the facial area to include the nose, bilateral hearing loss, and tinnitus were denied as there is no evidence of a nexus between these conditions and service.

The Board has remanded the case due to missing service records and a need for additional evidence from Social Security Administration.