Other conditions decisions — 2012

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have qualifying service to be eligible for the one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund.

The Veteran seeks service connection for a left eye disability, but the claim is being remanded due to the need for additional medical examination and development of records.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for legal entitlement to the one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund due to a lack of recognized service in the United States Armed Forces.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for a one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund as he is not eligible due to lack of qualifying service.

The Veteran's claims for service connection are being remanded to obtain a VA examination and medical opinion regarding the nature and etiology of her claimed spine arthritis, disc compression, upper extremity pain, twisted pelvis, and leg length discrepancy.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal regarding the issue of payment or reimbursement for unauthorized medical expenses received at Shands Jacksonville from May 29, 2010, through May 30, 2010.

The Veteran's treatment at a private medical facility for his right index finger injury was not authorized in advance by VA, and the Board finds that it did not meet the criteria for reimbursement under either Section 1725 or 1728 of the law. The appeal is denied.

The evidence does not support the Veteran's claim that her current gastrointestinal disorder, including reflux esophagitis and gastritis, is related to her military service.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development of his service treatment records and VA outpatient records.

The Veteran's adjustment disorder has been manifested by symptoms such as anxiety, suspiciousness, feelings of detachment or estrangement from others, startle response, hypervigilance, sleep disturbance, depressed mood, and irritability. However, there is no evidence that these symptoms result in occupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection as his TMJ disorder is not related to his in-service bilateral subcondylar osteotomy and subtotal odontectomy.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for peripheral neuropathies of the bilateral hands, claimed as secondary to diabetes mellitus, type II, is being remanded due to incomplete VA examination opinions and the need for additional evidence.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for insomnia and anger, as there was no evidence of a diagnosed disability. The claim for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for right shoulder disability prior to July 22, 2009, is also denied.

The Board found that there is no evidence to support a finding that the Veteran currently suffers from cold injury residuals of the feet that are the result of a disease or injury suffered in active duty service.

The Veteran's claim for an increased initial rating for dysthymic disorder remains before the Board after a recent remand. Further development is needed, including a new VA psychiatric examination and consideration of newly received medical records.

The Board found that the Veteran's uterine fibroids are not related to her active service and denied her claim for service connection.

The Veteran claims compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for residuals from a craniotomy and clipping of an aneurysm, alleging negligence by VA in diagnosing his right ear discomfort and not informing him about the residual aneurysm or leaving fibrous material in his skull.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including scheduling a VA examination and obtaining treatment records. The appellant's claim will be readjudicated based on the updated evidence.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's varicose veins are not related to his service and have denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that the appellant's annual income exceeds the maximum allowable rate for nonservice-connected death pension benefits, and thus her claim is denied.