Neck / cervical spine decisions — 2014

The Veteran's cervical spine strain post injury with headaches has been rated at 10 percent since December 12, 2007. The disability does not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on limitation of motion or other symptoms.

The Board found that there is no evidence to support a direct service connection for cervical spine disability or cervical radiculopathy of the left upper extremity, and thus denied both claims.

The Veteran's cervical spondylosis with degenerative disc disease was rated at 10 percent prior to April 20, 2012.

The Board has remanded the case for further action due to inadequate examinations in previous decisions.

The Board has determined that a remand is necessary to obtain additional evidence and provide the Veteran with an adequate VA examination.

The Board found that the Veteran's upper back and neck disabilities did not have onset during his active service, arthritis of these areas did not manifest within one year of separation from active service, and his current conditions were not caused by his active service. The Board concluded that there was insufficient evidence to rebut the presumption of soundness in this case.

The Veteran's claims for higher initial disability ratings for his cervical spine, low back, and right shoulder disabilities were denied. The appeals are based on the criteria set forth in VA's Schedule for Rating Disabilities.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for cervical and lumbar spine disorders, as well as hallux valgus with bursitis of the right foot. The evidence does not support a finding that these conditions are related to military service.

The Veteran's service-connected cervical DDD and radiculopathy have been rated at the maximum available rating of 20 percent, and no higher. The Board finds that his symptoms do not warrant a higher evaluation.

The Veteran's service-connected cervical spine strain has been increased to a 20 percent evaluation effective September 28, 2012. The previous noncompensable rating was corrected in October 2012.

The Veteran's cervical and lumbar spine disabilities are found to be at least as likely as not related to his service, including parachute jumps. The claim for service connection is granted.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for a seizure disorder, an eye disability, and a heart disability. The neck disability was found not to be related to military service.

The Board found that the Veteran's cervical spine disorder is not related to military service and denied his claim. The skin disorder was also denied as it is not attributable to military service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current cervical strain, cervical spondylosis, and cervical neck fusion are related to his military service.

The Veteran's claims are being remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions regarding her service connection claims.

The Board has remanded the issue of entitlement to a total rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability (TDIU) for additional development. The issues of service connection for a brain tumor and cervical spine disability, as well as an increased rating for residuals of a fracture of the right tarsal navicular are also being remanded.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected degenerative disc disease of the lumbar and cervical spines are being remanded due to the need for additional examinations.

The Board has decided that additional development is needed to obtain medical records from the University of Maryland Medical Center in Baltimore, and to consider whether new evidence supports reopening claims for service connection for low back and neck disabilities.

The appeal is being remanded due to the Veteran's request for a Travel Board hearing. The case will be returned to the AOJ for further action.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for right knee surgery and service connection for a cervical spine condition was denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher evaluation or service connection based on direct criteria.