Other conditions decisions — 2019

The Veteran's daughter, the appellant, was awarded a permanent and total disability rating in October 2008. She applied for retroactive DEA benefits but did not meet the one-year filing requirement after her father's eligibility period ended.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a left hip disorder is being remanded due to the need for additional medical examination and consideration of outstanding private treatment records.

The appeal was dismissed due to the Veteran's death, and no jurisdiction remains for further consideration.

The appeal was dismissed due to the Veteran's death, and no jurisdiction remains for further consideration.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of ingrown toenail removal in both right and left great toes, finding that there is new and material evidence to support these claims. The Board also finds that it is at least as likely as not that the current ingrown toenail disabilities are related to service.

The Veteran's bruxism was granted a 20% rating effective September 18, 2013. The Board found that the condition warranted this increased rating based on symptoms of pain and tenderness.

The Veteran's right eye disability, including pain and vision loss, is denied as the Board finds no evidence of fault on VA's part in providing care. The complications were a known risk of the surgery.

The Veteran's death is remanded due to the cause of his cancer being unknown, and there are claims for service connection based on exposure at Camp Lejeune. The VA needs to obtain additional medical records and provide a clinical opinion regarding the relationship between the Veteran's terminal cancer and exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a VA examination and readjudication of the claim.

The Veteran's dependent parent, B.P., was recognized as a dependent and added to her award of VA disability compensation in June 2017. As this decision represents a full grant of the benefits sought, the appeal is dismissed.

The Board denied the reopening and service connection for cause of death due to lack of new and material evidence, concluding that there was no relationship between the Veteran's service and his cause of death.

The Veteran's service-connected bilateral knee disability is being remanded for a new VA examination to assess the current severity of his condition, as he has shown good cause for cancelling an earlier scheduled examination.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for vision loss, claimed as residuals of a left eye injury, has been dismissed due to the death of the Veteran.

The Veteran's death occurred before the eligibility criteria for a government-furnished headstone or marker were established, so his claim is denied.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for hypogammaglobulinemia, previously claimed as multiple myeloma, has been reopened and granted. The Board found that the evidence raised a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim due to exposure to diesel fuel fumes during active duty.

The Board has granted an effective date of October 8, 2014 for the addition of the Veteran's spouse, Z.H., as her dependent to her award of VA disability compensation.

The Veteran's liver disease, diagnosed post-liver transplant, is denied as not related to service, including his in-service exposure to herbicide agents and malaria.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the etiology of the Veteran's detached retina and retinoschisis, which is related to service. The VA examiner will need to provide an opinion on whether these conditions are linked to military service.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for throat and tongue cancer, loss of taste, tremors, and chronic upper gum infections due to herbicide exposure. The AOJ must consider additional argument and evidence submitted after receipt of a VHA medical expert opinion.

The Board found insufficient evidence to decide the Veteran's claim for a TDIU rating and remanded the case for further development.