Other conditions decisions — 2018

The Veteran's right lingual nerve paresthesia is currently rated at 30 percent, effective December 29, 2009. The appeal for a higher rating remains pending.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 30 percent for residuals of a right clavicle fracture, finding that the evidence did not meet the criteria for such an increase.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current cerebrovascular disability is not related to his active service, including in-service headaches and medications. The evidence does not support a finding of direct service connection.

The Board denied compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for a right eye disorder due to VA medical treatment in December 2014, finding that the additional disability was not caused by negligence or fault on VA's part.

The Board found that the Veteran's current gynecological disorders, including dysmenorrhea, uterine fibroids, adenomyosis, and ovarian cyst, were not incurred in or caused by service.

The Veteran's claim for an extension of eligibility for MGIB benefits is granted for the period from July 9, 2004 to March 22, 2005 due to physical disability preventing him from initiating or completing his education program.

The Veteran's claims for service connection have been granted, but the effective dates and ratings are being remanded due to disagreement with these determinations.

The Veteran's residuals of a right eye injury result in visual acuity of light perception only, but no anatomical loss or contraction of a visual field. A disability rating of 30 percent is granted for this condition.

The case is being remanded to the AOJ for further development, including an examination of the Veteran's left fifth finger disability and service connection claims.

The Board denied service connection for a left foot disability other than eczematous dermatitis of the left heel with removal of toenails, finding that there was no in-service injury or disease and that the current condition is not causally related to service.

The Board has reopened the claim of entitlement to an earlier effective date for the additional amount payable for the Veteran's dependent spouse, J.S., and finds that additional development is necessary. The case is REMANDED for issuance of a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC).

The Veteran does not have a current dental disorder for which VA compensation may be paid, and therefore the claim for service connection is denied.

The Board found that the Veteran's pre-existing eye condition, exotropia, did not worsen during service and denied service connection for this condition. The Board also found no evidence of a current disability related to military service for any other diagnosed eye disorder.

The Board found that the Veteran does not have current arthritis that was manifested during active service or to a compensable degree within the first post-service year after active service, or is otherwise related to service or a service-connected disability. As such, the claim for service connection for arthritis of joints other than the feet or spine has been denied.

The Veteran is not entitled to a disability rating in excess of 60 percent for his lung disorder from August 16, 2005 to December 14, 2014.,The Veteran is not entitled to TDIU as his service-connected lung condition does not prevent him from securing and maintaining substantially gainful employment.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development due to incomplete examination and lack of discussion on the relationship between hypertension medications and dry eye.

The Board has remanded the case for further development regarding potential herbicide exposure at Camp Casey in Korea. The appeal will be reconsidered after this additional development.

The Board found that the Veteran's recurrent pneumonias were not caused or contributed to by his service-connected shell fragment wound to the chest, and thus denied the claim for service connection for the cause of death.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's duodenal ulcer does not meet the criteria for a higher rating, but has found that he meets the requirements for TDIU based on his service-connected disabilities and their impact on his ability to work.

The Board denied the appellant's claim as she was not recognized as the surviving spouse of the Veteran for purposes of VA benefits due to her divorce from the Veteran at the time of his death and lack of subsequent remarriage.