Other conditions decisions — 2022

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a skin condition/rash, finding that his current skin disabilities did not have onset during military service or within one year of discharge from service and are not shown to be related to his military service. The Board also found no evidence linking Agent Orange exposure to the Veteran's skin conditions.

The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for her left hand ganglion cyst and her TDIU claim are both remanded due to the need for additional development, including an examination.

The Veteran's partial hysterectomy is currently rated at 30 percent, and the Board finds no basis to grant a higher rating.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for recognizing his mother as a dependent parent was denied because the AOJ did not receive the requested information to establish dependency status prior to January 19, 2012.

The Board denied service connection for neurological disorders of the bilateral upper extremities, finding no evidence to support a nexus between these conditions and service or any service-connected disabilities.

The Board denied the claim to reopen service connection for cause of death as there was no new and material evidence received, and the Veteran did not have POW status.

The Veteran's bilateral groin and testicle pain has been rated at the maximum 10 percent since October 5, 2016.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of medical rationale in the January 2020 addendum opinion, and a new VA examination is needed to address the relationship between the Veteran's right leg pain with muscle spasms and his service-connected bilateral pes planus.

The appeal has been dismissed as the appellant requested withdrawal of the appeal.

The Board has remanded the case due to conflicting information regarding whether VR&E services have been approved for the Veteran to pursue a Juris Doctor degree. The AOJ must clarify this and provide written confirmation if such approval exists, or explain any discrepancies.

The Board dismissed the appeal as the appellant withdrew their claim for nonservice-connected pension benefits.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for a higher rating for Bell's palsy residuals due to insufficient consideration of her lay statements regarding symptom frequency, duration, and severity.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for discoid lupus erythematosus, finding that there was no evidence linking his current condition to his military service or exposure to herbicide agents. The most probative medical opinions were against a link between the Veteran's current condition and service.

The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's right eye disability, finding that it was aggravated beyond its natural progression due to a superimposed injury caused in service.

The Veteran is seeking a TDIU for the period on appeal from June 14, 2010. The Board has determined that she meets the criteria for a TDIU during this period.,For the period prior to June 14, 2010, the Veteran's combined disability rating did not meet the percentage standards set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a), so her claim is being referred to the Director of Compensation Service for extraschedular TDIU consideration under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b).

The Board denied service connection for a disability manifested by balance problems and falling, finding no evidence of a separate and distinct current disability. The Veteran's symptoms were attributed to his hypertension.

The Board has decided to remand the claims of service connection for AVM with repair, a bilateral eye disability, and a gastrointestinal disability due to inadequate reasons and bases in finding substantial compliance with prior remands. The Veteran's AVM is considered a congenital disease rather than a defect, and further examination and opinion are required.

The Board has remanded the case for further consideration due to conflicting findings regarding potential muscle injuries sustained during service.

The Board has found that substantial compliance with previous remand directives was not achieved and requires another remand for the issue of entitlement to total disability due to individual unemployability prior to June 4, 2019.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's current right hand condition is related to his in-service injury. The case will be returned for further examination and a reasoned medical opinion.