Knee decisions — 2008

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased evaluations for his right knee disability, finding that there was no evidence of instability or other service-connected conditions warranting higher ratings.

The Board found that there is no competent evidence showing a right knee disability that began during military service, and thus denied the veteran's claim for service connection.

The veteran's bilateral pes planus, internal derangement of the left knee with osteoarthritis changes, and osteoarthritic changes of the left hip are all found to be related to his military service. However, there is no evidence of a current kidney disorder.

The veteran's claims for increased evaluations for his service-connected chondromalacia of the right and left knees are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including scheduling VA examinations.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a currently diagnosed left knee disability, acid reflux disease, or low back disability. Therefore, service connection for these conditions is denied.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have a current right leg, right knee, or right ankle disorder. The left leg disorder is also not currently diagnosed. Therefore, service connection for these conditions cannot be granted.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including providing VCAA notice and scheduling a videoconference hearing.

The Board has determined that additional development is required to determine the etiology of the veteran's claimed bilateral knee disorder, bilateral hearing loss, and tinnitus. The case is therefore REMANDED for further action.

The veteran's claims for increased ratings for his right knee and left hand/wrist disabilities were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating for either condition.

The veteran's claim for a total rating based on individual unemployability due to his service-connected disabilities is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining outstanding VA treatment records and arranging for an examination by a VA examiner.

The Board has decided that further development is needed to determine if the veteran's current left knee disorder is related to his military service. The case will be returned to the RO for this purpose.

The veteran's TDIU claim is being remanded for further development, including a VA medical examination to assess his employability due to service-connected disabilities.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for vocational rehabilitation benefits under Chapter 31 of Title 38 of the United States Code due to a lack of an employment handicap.

The Board has determined that the veteran did not submit new and material evidence to reopen her claim of service connection for a knee disorder, as the submitted evidence does not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim or raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the underlying claim.

The Board denied entitlement to increased ratings for PTSD and residuals of a fragment wound to the left knee, finding that the evidence did not warrant higher evaluations based on the veteran's symptoms and functional impairment.

The veteran's claim for payment of unauthorized medical expenses incurred in July 2005 at a private hospital was granted. The treatment was deemed necessary due to an emergency condition and the VA facility was not feasibly available.

The Board has granted the veteran's claims for effective dates of January 5, 2004, for service connection for left and right total knee replacements and narcolepsy with cataplexy.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for chronic residuals of polyarticular septic arthritis, osteoarthritis of the cervical spine, and osteoarthritis of the right knee. The examiner found no direct link between these conditions and her active duty service.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected right knee disability is being remanded due to the need for further evidentiary development and completion of due process requirements.

The Board has remanded the case to obtain additional medical records and determine if there is a relationship between the veteran's current back disability and his service in May 1956.