Epilepsy & seizure disorders decisions — 2008

The Board denied reopening the claims for residuals of bilateral knee injuries and complex partial seizures, as well as service connection for a right shoulder injury due to lack of new and material evidence.,There is no credible evidence showing that the veteran's current conditions had their onset during active service or are related to any in-service disease or injury.

The Board found that the veteran's seizure disorder was not incurred in or aggravated by his active duty service and is not otherwise related to such service.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claim for service connection for a disability manifested by seizures or blackouts due to insufficient evidence regarding the relationship between his current condition and military service.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased rating, reopening of service connection claims, and service connection for various conditions. The claim for an increased rating was denied as the evidence did not show at least one major seizure in the past two years or more than five to eight minor seizures per week.

The Board has determined that additional evidentiary development is needed, including providing the veteran with VCAA notice, verifying his reserve service, obtaining missing medical records from Woodbridge Township, and providing a new VA medical opinion to determine the nature and etiology of his current psychiatric disability.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a seizure disorder that is causally linked to his service, and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of head trauma to include seizures and a low back disorder, finding that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen these previously denied claims.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to inconsistencies in the veteran's service history and inability to obtain relevant medical records.

The veteran's claims are being remanded to the New Orleans, Louisiana RO for a Travel Board hearing. The case will be returned to the Board after the hearing.

The Board denied service connection for a seizure disorder and skin irritation, finding no evidence to support these conditions as related to the veteran's military service.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities do not preclude him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation consistent with his education and work background.

The Board denied service connection for gunshot wound residuals, including epilepsy and claustrophobia. The issues of reopening previously denied claims were remanded.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to missing medical records and a need for further examination.

The veteran's claim for special monthly compensation based on the need for aid and attendance of another person is denied as her service-connected conditions do not meet the criteria.

The Board has granted service connection for a psychogenic non-epileptic seizure disorder and remanded the remaining issues for further development.

The Board denied service connection for seizure disorder, chronic low back disorder, heart condition, and ulcerative colitis due to insufficient evidence linking these conditions to the veteran's time in service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claimed conditions, including CNS sarcoidosis and its secondary effects such as pancytopenia, seizure disorder, perirectal abscesses, left thigh abscess, diabetes mellitus, and abnormal liver function tests, were not incurred or aggravated by service. The evidence does not support a finding of direct service connection for these conditions.

The veteran's hypertension, seizure disorder, and lung carcinoma with metastasis were not related to his service.,The cause of the veteran's death was not due to a service-connected disability.

The Board has determined that the veteran's seizure disorder is not related to service or a service-connected disability, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to a duty-to-assist violation.