Other conditions decisions — 2004

The veteran is seeking service connection for a partial gastrectomy, which he contends was caused by his service-connected hiatal hernia or other service-connected disabilities, or as a result of medications required for those service-connected disabilities, or was secondary to exposure to Agent Orange. The Board has determined that additional development is needed.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation of his post-operative fracture of the mandible is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination and consideration of DeLuca v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 202 (1995).

The Board has determined that the veteran's elevated prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels are not service-connected due to lack of evidence showing a direct link to his military service, and specifically denied any presumption based on Agent Orange exposure.

The Board found that the evidence did not support a finding of additional disability as a result of VA treatment, and concluded that VA exercised proper skill and care in diagnosing and treating the veteran's condition.

The veteran is seeking service connection for a skin disorder, including porphyria cutanea tarda or a variant thereof, due to exposure to herbicide agents during his military service. The case has been remanded for additional development and medical examination.

The veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development, including a VA examination and obtaining SSA records.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for recognition as the veteran's surviving spouse, finding that she was divorced from him at the time of his death and did not meet the requirements to be considered a surviving spouse.

The veteran's claim is being remanded for further development, including obtaining medical records and a VA examination to assess the severity of his post-surgical scars from basal cell carcinoma.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA benefits as her husband had no recognized active service, and thus she is not considered a veteran for purposes of VA benefits.

The Board has granted an initial rating of 20 percent for the veteran's right hip strain, effective from the date of the decision.

The Board found that the appellant's late husband had no service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. Therefore, he was not eligible for VA benefits based on his alleged World War II service.

The appellant is not eligible for DIC at the full-dollar rate due to her residency and citizenship status, despite her deceased husband having service in the organized military forces of the Government of the Commonwealth of the Philippines.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including scheduling a videoconference hearing and allowing the appellant to change her representative.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA benefits, finding that her spouse did not have the requisite military service to establish eligibility.

The Board denied the appellant's request to reopen her claim of service connection for the cause of the veteran's death, finding that no new and material evidence had been received.

The veteran's claim for an increased disability rating for PTSD is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination and additional medical records.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including a sleep study and an examination to determine if central sleep apnea was present during service. The veteran's claims of service connection for intramedullary mass at C-5 and temporary total evaluation are pending.

The veteran's request for educational assistance benefits under Chapter 1606, Title 10, United States Code was denied because he did not apply within one year of completing his bachelor's degree and the legal criteria governing the payment of these benefits are clear.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a psychiatric disability, finding that new and material evidence had not been submitted to reopen his previous denial in February 1965.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for additional compensation for a spouse, finding that he did not provide proof of dependents within one year of notification of his eligibility.