Other conditions decisions — 2022

The Board has remanded the case for further development to determine if the appellant provided funds and an itemized report of what his mother still owed him regarding unreimbursed medical expenses and in-home care during her last sickness.

The Veteran's service-connected lung cancer residuals do not meet the criteria for a rating in excess of 30 percent. The Board has also found that there are non-respiratory residuals due to his lung cancer, but further examination is needed to determine their nature and etiology.

The Veteran's squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus and secondary head and neck cancer are found to be etiologically related to his service, specifically exposure to toxic solvents during his military duties as a motor vehicle operator at Camp Lejeune.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient verification of drill days and pay, as well as for further development related to the overpayment claim.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate examination findings and a need for further development, including obtaining updated treatment records and scheduling VA examinations.

The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claim for service connection for whole-body lipomas due to incomplete compliance with previous remands and need for additional medical opinions.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for a waiver of recovery of an overpayment of VA compensation benefits in the amount of $21,652.04 due to his incarceration and conviction of a felony.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral shin splints has been reopened, but the claim is denied. The RO also remanded several other claims related to his knees and ankles.

The Veteran's right and left leg varicose veins are rated at 20 percent each, which is the maximum rating allowed under VA regulations.

The Board has decided to remand the cases for further action due to the need for VA medical opinions regarding whether the Veteran's polycythemia and monoclonal gammopathy are related to herbicide agent exposure.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's service-connected PTSD may have aggravated her diagnosed cardiac disability, but more evidence is needed to determine if it was caused by or secondary to PTSD.

The Veteran's claims for TDIU are being remanded due to insufficient information in the evidence of record regarding his employment status and how his service-connected disabilities affect his ability to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claims for clothing allowances for back braces in the years of 2013, 2014, and 2015 due to his service-connected lower back strain.

The Veteran and Appellant divorced in September 2017. The appeal is about the effective date of an apportionment of the Veteran's benefits, which was originally awarded from March 1, 2017 to September 30, 2017. The Board denied the claim as the Appellant did not file a valid claim for an extension beyond the divorce date.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for right and left foot disorders due to insufficient consideration of relevant evidence in prior decisions.

The Board has found that there has not been substantial compliance with previous remand directives and thus another remand is required. The appeal must be remanded for an independent medical expert to provide a thorough opinion regarding the complications resulting from the Veteran's carotid artery surgery.

The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's left side muscle strain, which he claimed as hypogonadism. The decision is based on the fact that his current condition is caused by his service-connected left testicle varicocele.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's death was not due to his own willful misconduct and he was entitled to DIC benefits under 38 U.S.C. § 1318, but the basic threshold criteria for establishing entitlement are not met.

The Board has remanded the TDIU claim due to insufficient information about the Veteran's current employment and financial status, as well as his prior periods of unemployment.

The Board has determined that the Veteran did not meet criteria for a TDIU prior to April 3, 2017 and thus denied the claim. The appeal is dismissed as there are no longer any justiciable issues.