Other conditions decisions — 2018

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a dental condition (claimed as teeth) for compensation purposes is denied because there is no evidence of loss of substance of the body of the maxilla or mandible during service resulting from trauma.

The Board denied service connection for emphysema as the evidence did not show it was related to military service.

The Board has reopened the claim for service connection for narcolepsy but requires further development before a decision can be made.

The Veteran's cancer of the throat and tongue is remanded for further examination to determine if it could be characterized as a respiratory cancer or related to in-service exposure to herbicide agents.

The Veteran's appeal was denied because the claim was based on an invalid regulation. The case is being remanded to reassess the eligibility for VA reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal regarding the claim for service connection for residuals of dental trauma.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of a right ear infection, finding that there was no competent medical evidence linking his current condition to his active duty service.

The Veteran's appeal regarding eligibility for financial assistance in the purchase of an automobile or other conveyance and necessary adaptive equipment was dismissed as moot due to his death.

The Board denied the claims for service connection for gastrointestinal (GI) tract disability due to service-connected hemorrhoidectomy, granted the claim for the cause of the Veteran’s death, and denied the TDIU claim.

The Board has remanded the case due to deficiencies in the April 2017 VA examination, and the Veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for bilateral patella recurrent subluxation must be remanded. The case will be reviewed upon completion of further development.

The Board has granted the Veteran's application to reopen his claim for service connection of right thumb arthritis, but denied the claim itself.

The Veteran's dysthymic disorder is rated at a 70 percent level, effective from the date of the July 2015 rating decision.

The Veteran's appendiceal adenocarcinoma was not incurred in service and is not related to his active duty. The Board found the evidence against a finding of service connection.

The Veteran's bilateral pterygium disability is currently rated as 20 percent disabling. The Board has ordered a remand for further examination and rating considerations, including consideration of newly applicable rating criteria. Additionally, the TDIU claim is also being remanded.

The Veteran's claim for typhoid due to mustard gas exposure is denied as there is no credible evidence of such exposure in service.,The Veteran's claim for osteoporosis due to an undiagnosed illness or other qualifying, chronic disability pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1117 is denied as he did not serve in the Southwest Asia theatre of operations and there is no credible evidence linking his condition to service.,The Veteran's claim for exposure to molds is denied as such exposure alone does not constitute a disability for VA compensation purposes.,The Veteran's claim for small pox due to herbicide exposure and service in Southwest Asia is denied as he did not serve in the Southwest Asia theatre of operations and there is no credible evidence linking his condition to service.,The Veteran's claim for exposure to anthrax and asbestos is denied as there is no credible evidence of such exposures in service.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for Kaposi's sarcoma and actinic keratosis due to insufficient evidence of a relationship between these conditions and his active duty service. The Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents during Vietnam, but this exposure is not related to the claimed conditions.

The Board denied the appellant's claim as she and the Veteran were legally divorced at the time of the Veteran's death, thus denying her status as his surviving spouse for VA benefits.

The Board has remanded the cases for further development and adjudication due to the need to obtain VA treatment records, SSA disability records, and ensure all relevant information is considered.

The Board denied the claim for recognition as the surviving spouse of the Veteran due to a lack of evidence showing that the appellant was married to the Veteran at the time of his death. The Veteran and the appellant had been separated, and there is no evidence they were legally married.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for an aneurysm, claimed as brain aneurysm rupture, is denied because there is no evidence of a current disability or any link to service.