Other conditions decisions — 2012

The Veteran's appeal for endometriosis disability ratings has been withdrawn by the appellant through her authorized representative.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and attempting to obtain records from University of Louisville Neurology, University Neurologists, and Dr. S. The Veteran's service-connected disabilities alone must be evaluated to determine if they necessitate aid and attendance.

The Veteran's right hand disability is not considered to be caused by the VA surgery in December 1992, and therefore compensation benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 are denied.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development due to the need for a VA examination and compliance with prior Board directives.

The Board found that the appellant did not have qualifying service for benefits from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund, and thus denied the claim.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have recognized active military service for the purpose of obtaining a one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund, and thus legal entitlement to this benefit is denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for retroactive dependency benefits based on Appellant's school attendance, finding no legal basis to grant the claim as a timely application was not submitted.

The Veteran's claim of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including intermittent explosive disorder and personality disorder NOS, is being remanded due to the need for a videoconference hearing.

The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn due to the appellant moving to withdraw the pending issue of entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 60 percent for impairment of anal sphincter control.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to address the Veteran's claims, including obtaining medical records and determining whether he meets the percentage requirements for TDIU.

The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for additional disability claimed due to VA surgery is denied as there is no evidence of an additional disability proximately due to the September 2004 lung resection.

The Veteran's claim for a higher disability evaluation for his spine disability is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and scheduling a new VA examination.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for retroactive dependency benefits based on his son's school attendance, finding that no timely application was filed within the one-year filing period.

The Board denied service connection for a low back disorder and flat feet, but granted new and material evidence for the skin disorder. The decision is mixed as some issues were granted while others were not.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an effective date earlier than July 1, 2009 for the inclusion of J.J.M.H. as his spouse due to lack of entitlement under VA law.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the Veteran's claims for service connection for prostatitis and epididymitis. The previous denials were based on a lack of evidence establishing a nexus between these conditions and service.

The Board finds that the evidence is in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's death was caused by abrupt withdrawal of Xanax or due to underlying coronary artery disease. The cause of death listed on his death certificate, acute myocardial infarction, may have been masked by medication therapy for anxiety and tachycardia.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have qualifying military service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army or recognized guerrillas in the service of the United States Armed Forces, and therefore is not eligible for a one-time payment from the FVEC fund.

The Board has remanded the case due to issues with the character of discharge from service, and the Veteran must provide documentation regarding this issue. The claim will be readjudicated after resolving these matters.

The Board has determined that the appellant's countable income exceeds the maximum annual death pension rate, and therefore she is not entitled to nonservice-connected death pension benefits.