Other conditions decisions — 2022

The Board has dismissed the appeals for service connection of sleep condition and memory/concentration condition due to the appellant's withdrawal.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining VA and private treatment records and scheduling a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any currently present bilateral lower extremity lymphedema or edema. The Veteran's right and left foot disabilities are not entitled to higher ratings.

The Board has decided the increased rating and separate initial disability rating claims for left little finger ankylosis. The TDIU claim is remanded for further development.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and adjudication due to incomplete information regarding the Veteran's employment status prior to May 16, 2011. The claims of TDIU and SMC at the housebound rate are inextricably intertwined.

The Board denied service connection for arthritis, finding no evidence of its onset during or related to the Veteran's military service. The claim was also not granted for secondary service connection as there is insufficient medical evidence linking the arthritis to his service-connected conditions.

The Board has granted an initial 10 percent evaluation for the Veteran's bilateral foot calluses throughout the appeal period, finding that they are painful and affect his ability to walk with shoes but do not meet criteria for a higher rating due to lack of instability or size.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient information regarding the Veteran's employment history and failure to obtain Social Security Administration (SSA) records. The appellant is encouraged to provide VA with her former employers' names, addresses, and contact information.

The Board dismissed the appeal of entitlement to accrued benefits as the appellant withdrew his appeal before a decision was made.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for further development regarding his left knee disability, including limitation of motion and instability. The current ratings are not higher than the assigned levels.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining private gynecological records and providing an opinion on whether the Veteran's hysterectomy is related to her service.

The Board has determined that there may be outstanding records regarding the appellant's marital status and eligibility for DIC benefits. The decision is remanded to obtain these records.

The Veteran's claim for a TDIU was remanded due to the need for additional development, including completion of a VA Form 21-8940. The Board is not bound by the Director's findings regarding extraschedular TDIU and requires more specific information to determine eligibility for TDIU benefits.

The Board has remanded the case for a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's eye disability is related to his service. The issue of compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 will be considered concurrently with the direct service connection claim.

The Board has remanded the case due to inconsistencies in enrollment dates and payment records, and for consideration of a legal precedent that allows for benefits exceeding 48 months.

The Board has remanded the claims for further development and review.,Service connection is not granted for liver disability or prostate disability.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's bladder disability is proximately due or aggravated by his service-connected lumbar spine disability. Further medical examination and opinion are needed.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate examination and insufficient consideration of the Veteran's reports of in-service sun exposure and submitted articles linking his skin cancer to herbicide exposure.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinions regarding service connection for cause of death, specifically related to in-service asbestos exposure and Digitalis use.

The Veteran withdrew his claim for medical reimbursement, and the Board dismissed it.

The Board has remanded the TDIU claim due to unclear employment history and potential gaps in the record. The Veteran's representative stated she remained unable to work for substantial periods of time after 2005, but there is conflicting information about her employment timeline.