Other conditions decisions — 2022

The Veteran's spouse was added as a dependent to his VA disability compensation effective May 9, 2006. The Board found that an earlier effective date of May 9, 2006 is warranted.

The Veteran's initial claim for a hiatal hernia was granted with a noncompensable rating, and the appeal is now remanded to consider his request for an increased evaluation.

The Board has determined that the matter must be remanded for further development, including obtaining an accounting of the Veteran's use of educational assistance benefits under Chapter 30 and 33. The appeal will not address issues of service connection or increased ratings.

The Board has determined that the VA medical opinions provided were inadequate and remands the case for further development to obtain a new opinion addressing whether the inguinal hernia is related to service, proximately due to or caused by service-connected back disability, and aggravated by service-connected back disability.

The Veteran's service-connected paralysis of the 9th cranial nerve has been found to be normal throughout the appeal period, with no identified symptomatology. As such, a rating greater than 10 percent is denied.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for his right ulnar nerve disability, limitation of motion of the right long finger, and chronic Jersey finger of the right ring finger were denied. The Veteran was assigned a 10 percent rating for each condition.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for further development regarding his service connection claims, including an examination to determine the etiology of conjunctivitis.

The Board has granted service connection for nightmare disorder, finding that the Veteran's current diagnosis is related to his active military service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's right elbow and stomach conditions are not service-connected due to insufficient evidence, and remanded for further examination and opinion.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a psychiatric disorder, finding that his personality disorder is not a compensable disability and there was no evidence of additional disability due to aggravation during service. The Board also found that he did not have an acquired psychiatric disorder such as schizophrenia.

The Board has remanded the case due to additional relevant evidence being added to the record, and the Veteran requested a remand for AOJ review of this new evidence.

The Board has decided to remand the DIC claim due to a request for information on prior VA examiners, and they have requested this information in compliance with Francway v. Wilkie (2019).

The Board has denied service connection for pancreatitis, finding that the Veteran's condition did not have its onset in service and was not caused by any service-connected disability.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a throat condition, nose condition, and breathing condition as secondary to his service-connected throat cancer. The Veteran does not have diagnosed conditions of the throat, nose, or breathing that meet the criteria for service connection.

The Board denied service connection for left and right hip conditions, finding that the evidence does not support a link to service or any other condition.

The Veteran's residuals of uvuloplasty are currently rated at 30 percent, and the Board has determined that a higher rating is not warranted based on the evidence showing moderate stricture of the esophagus.

The Board dismissed the appeal for accrued benefits as the appellant withdrew her request.

The Board denied service connection for Dercum's disease, finding that the evidence does not support a finding of in-service onset or aggravation and that there is no direct link between the condition and military service.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's right inguinal hernia warrants a remand for further evaluation, and his claim for TDIU prior to August 8, 2017 is inextricably intertwined with this issue. The claims are being returned to the AOJ for additional development.

The Veteran's claim for a clothing allowance due to his service-connected Reiter's syndrome is remanded as the Board needs clarification on whether his back brace was used due to his Reiter's syndrome.