Knee Board decisions

The Board has remanded the case due to the veteran's inability to attend his hearing, and a new video conference hearing is scheduled.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claimed bilateral knee and foot disabilities were not incurred in or related to his active military service. The VA examinations, National Guard records, and private medical records do not support a link between the current disabilities and service.

The veteran's service-connected left shoulder disorder is currently rated as 10 percent disabling. The Board finds that the evidence does not support a higher rating.,Service connection for right knee and right shoulder disorders cannot be established as there is no in-service diagnosis or treatment of these conditions, and no competent medical evidence linking current diagnoses to military service.

The veteran's claims for higher initial disability ratings for his bilateral knee conditions were granted, with a rating of 10 percent each.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for increased evaluations of her service-connected right knee and left wrist disabilities have been denied. The current ratings are deemed appropriate.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to the veteran's failure to report for scheduled VA examinations. The claims of service connection and increased rating for left knee disability, as well as a compensable rating for Dupuytren's cyst, are pending.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed due to the lack of recent VA examination and the veteran's testimony indicating worsening symptoms. The case is being remanded for a new VA examination.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation of his incomplete paralysis, median nerve, left hand disability was denied. The Board found that the evidence did not demonstrate complete paralysis to warrant a higher rating under Diagnostic Code 8515. Additionally, the veteran's claim for financial assistance in acquiring specially adapted housing due to loss or use of one lower extremity and associated disabilities was also denied.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for right knee, left ankle, stomach, and low back disabilities. The examiner found no current diagnoses or etiology that supported these claims.

The Board denied the veteran's claim to reopen his service connection for PTSD, finding no new and material evidence.

The RO granted additional, separate 50 percent ratings for limitation of extension in each knee, effective from January 18, 2005.

The veteran's left knee disability, manifested by constant pain and limited motion, does not warrant a rating in excess of the current 10 percent evaluation.

The Board has determined that the veteran's October 2000 substantive appeal to the June 19, 1999 rating decision was timely filed. The Board also found that the veteran did not submit a timely substantive appeal of the January 3, 1996 rating decision; thus, the Board does not have jurisdiction to consider an appeal stemming from that rating decision.

The veteran's low back disability is rated at 10 percent prior to June 11, 2002 and at 20 percent from June 11, 2002. The left knee disability warrants a noncompensable rating. Pseudofolliculitis barbae is rated at 10 percent. Bilateral trigger finger disabilities are each rated as noncompensable.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current left knee disability, including degenerative joint disease, is not related to service and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The veteran's claims for service connection were denied. The Board found that the claimed skin disorders, including chloracne, are not related to his active service or herbicide exposure.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities were not continuously rated totally disabling for the required period, and he was not a former prisoner of war. Therefore, DIC benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318 are denied.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claims for service connection for right knee and low back disabilities, but these issues are remanded for further development.

The Board has decided to remand the case for additional development, including obtaining clinical data and VA examinations.

The Board denied an earlier effective date for the award of TDIU, finding that entitlement to TDIU is not factually ascertainable prior to August 1, 1990.