Hearing loss decisions — 2025

The Board remands the claim for a rating in excess of 20 percent for service-connected bilateral hearing loss to correct a pre-decisional duty to assist error.

The appeal for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus was dismissed due to untimely filing.

The Veteran's appeal for a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss was withdrawn and dismissed.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss as the evidence did not support a current disability. The appeal was also remanded to correct a pre-decisional duty to assist error regarding the claim for service connection for bilateral pes planus with metatarsalgia and plantar fasciitis.

The claim for service connection for left ear hearing loss is remanded due to an inadequate medical opinion.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for a compensable evaluation for left ear hearing loss and service connection for right foot, left foot, lumbar spine, and right lower extremity radiculopathy conditions.

The Board granted service connection for right ear hearing loss but denied an initial compensable evaluation for bilateral hearing loss.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for right ear hearing loss based on the current level of disability, as measured by audiometric test results.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and remanded the claims for TMJ, tinnitus, sleep apnea, lumbar spine disability, increased rating for right hip limitation of flexion, compensable rating for right hip impairment of the thigh, and compensable rating for right hip limitation of extension.

The Board denied service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability with auditory processing disorder as the Veteran did not have a current disability within the meaning of VA regulations.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for an increased rating for allergic rhinitis and service connection for right ear hearing loss, chronic fatigue syndrome, chronic sinusitis, dermatosis of the right arm and legs, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), a respiratory disability, restless leg syndrome on the left, and RLS on the right.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss and service connection for fibromyalgia, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), back disability, and sleep apnea. The claim for an acquired psychiatric disorder was remanded.

The Board granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss, attributing it to military service.

The Board denied service connection for lumbar spine, cervical spine, bilateral hearing loss, and left shoulder disabilities. The claims for erectile dysfunction and a respiratory disability were remanded.

The Board dismissed the appeals for service connection of a right lower extremity nerve condition and tinnitus, granted readjudication of the claim for an acquired psychiatric disability (PTSD), denied service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability, and denied an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for a right knee disability.

The Board granted service connection for cervical strain, lumbosacral strain, and patellofemoral pain syndrome but denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss, sinusitis, a higher rating for rhinitis, and an initial compensable rating for asthma.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and remanded the claims for tinnitus, a headache disorder, a foot disability, a left ankle disability, a low back disability, radiculopathy of the right lower extremity, radiculopathy of the left lower extremity, and an acquired psychiatric disorder.

The Veteran was granted a 100 percent rating for glioblastoma and service connection for bilateral hearing loss.

The appeal for a disability rating in excess of 50 percent for PTSD and the appeal for a compensable disability rating for hypertension were dismissed due to procedural defects. The claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and kidney disability are remanded for further development.

The appeal was dismissed due to an improper concurrent election of review options.