Other conditions decisions — 2005

The Board has reopened the claim for service connection for refractive error and bilateral macular disease as secondary to migratory polyarthritis. The veteran's current eye condition is being evaluated based on whether it is directly related to his service or if it is a new development not connected to any prior conditions.

The veteran's claims for an increased rating for appendectomy residuals, service connection for a gastrointestinal disorder, and reopening of his psychiatric disorder claim are being remanded to allow for additional development.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for a video hearing before a Veterans Law Judge at the RO. The issues include reopening and evaluating service connection for exophoria, increasing evaluations for an adjustment disorder with anxiety neurosis and depression, a deviated septum, and bilateral hearing loss.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and conducting a physical examination to determine if the veteran's current conditions are related to his military service.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence was not submitted to reopen the claim of service connection for hypertrophic gastritis, resulting in a denial.

The Board denied service connection for transient ischemic attacks, residuals of pneumonia, dizzy spells, and athlete's feet as these conditions are not shown to be related to the veteran's active duty.

The veteran's claim for reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a private facility on April 16, 2001 was denied by the VA Medical Center in Muskogee, Oklahoma.

The veteran requested to withdraw their appeal, and as a result, the Board has dismissed the case.

The Board has ordered additional medical records to be obtained and a VA physician's opinion on the proximate cause of the veteran's death. The appeal is pending further review.

The veteran withdrew his appeal, satisfied with the increase in his disability rating for psoriasiform eruptions.

The veteran's claims for service connection for skin and bone disease, claimed as residuals of exposure to ionizing radiation, are being remanded due to the need for additional development.

The Board determined that the veteran does not have a chronic acquired left eye disorder related to his service or surgery in service, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The VA denied the veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 as there was no evidence showing that VA care or treatment caused his current right eye problems.

The Board found that a psychiatric disorder, including agoraphobia, was not incurred in or aggravated by active military service and is not otherwise related to any incident of service.

The Board found that the veteran's leg cramps are not attributable to his active military service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board denied service connection for degenerative disease of the hips and back, finding that these conditions were not incurred or aggravated by active duty.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for sexual dysfunction and SMC for loss of use of a creative organ. The veteran was not found to have sexual dysfunction that is proximately due to or the result of nerve entrapment as a residual of his right inguinal herniorrhaphy, despite having pain during intercourse.

The Board denied the veteran's attempt to reopen his claim for service connection for a skin disorder, claimed as a result of Agent Orange exposure. The evidence received since April 1994 did not provide objective medical evidence of a current disability that had its onset during the veteran's period of service or a nexus between the veteran's period of service and any current skin disorder.

The Board has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for epididymitis, finding no current disability and noting that there is no medical evidence of post-service and current disability.

The veteran's chronic pancreatitis is not considered to be caused by the use of Depakote prescribed for his psychiatric condition, and therefore, he does not meet the criteria for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.