Other conditions decisions — 2013

The Veteran's bruxism claim is being remanded for further development, including obtaining a medical opinion to address whether the condition had its onset in service or is related to his PTSD.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development, including obtaining an addendum opinion from a VA examiner regarding the relationship between his hypercoagulability disorder and service-connected conditions as well as any potential herbicide exposure.

The Board has reopened the appellant's claim regarding his character of discharge, finding that new and material evidence supports reopening. The appeal is now on the merits.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining updated treatment records and providing the Veteran with VA examinations to address his claims of service connection for a prostate disorder and bilateral hip disorder.

The Veteran seeks increased ratings for PTSD, service connection for cancer at the base of the tongue due to herbicide exposure, and TDIU. The case is being remanded for additional development including VA examinations and consideration of new evidence.

The Veteran's left foot ulcer is claimed as secondary to his service-connected left ankle scar. The RO should arrange for the Veteran to be examined by an appropriate physician to determine the current severity of his residuals of a left ankle fracture.

The Veteran's request for a 90-day extension to submit additional evidence was granted due to showing of good cause.

The case is being remanded for the appellant to be scheduled for an in-person hearing before the Board at the Atlanta, Georgia, RO.

The Board denied the appellant's request for a waiver of overpayment of VA DIC benefits due to her failure to file the request within the required 180-day period following notification of the debt.

The Veteran seeks compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for additional abdominal disability, to include aggravation of a pre-existing ventral hernia, due to the manner in which the January 2009 nephrectomy was performed at a VA medical facility.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to the RO for further development and consideration, including scheduling a VA examination and obtaining additional medical records. The claim will be adjudicated again based on the new evidence.

The Board found that the appellant had no service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. Therefore, they denied the claim for a one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the Veteran's claim for service connection for a right foot disability. The case is remanded for further development, including scheduling of a VA examination.

The Board has denied the appellant's claim for a one-time payment from the FVEC Fund due to lack of qualifying service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces.

The Board has determined that the appellant did not have service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. Therefore, they are not eligible for benefits from the FVEC Fund.

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

The evidence received since the March 2004 decision is not new and material; therefore, the claim of entitlement to compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 due to the residuals of mercury poisoning was not reopened.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to the death of the appellant during the pendency of the appeal.

The Board denied the Appellant's claim for recognition as the Veteran's surviving spouse for VA benefits purposes due to her divorce from the Veteran prior to his death, which precludes her eligibility under VA regulations.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for service connection of a left eye injury was denied as the earliest possible effective date is February 4, 1981, when he filed his initial claim.