Other conditions decisions — 2022

The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral upper extremity disabilities, as they are related to his service-connected diabetes mellitus. The VA will need to obtain additional medical opinions and review relevant VA treatment records.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected LLE PLMD is remanded due to the need for additional development, including a new VA examination and sleep study.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to failure to comply with previous remands. A VA examination is needed to determine if the Veteran's back injury had its onset during service or is otherwise related to active duty.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for nonservice-connected (NSC) pension benefits because he did not have active military, naval, or air service during a period of war.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claim for service connection of bilateral cataracts, finding that there is no evidence to support a link between his current condition and his military service.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's claim for reimbursement of non-VA medical expenses from July 31, 2016 to August 5, 2016 at Largo Medical Center should be remanded due to unclear information about third-party liability and personal responsibility.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's diagnosed bilateral foot conditions are not related to his active-duty service and thus denied his claims for service connection.

The Board denied the appellant's claim as she was not married to the veteran at the time of his death, and therefore cannot be recognized as his surviving spouse for VA benefits.

The Board has remanded the case due to issues related to compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 and payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a private facility in Florida. The referral for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 must be adjudicated by the AOJ before the present claim can proceed.

The Veteran's death was caused by an acute cerebrovascular accident, but the Board is unable to determine if his hypertension, which may have started during service, occurred during active duty or inactive duty training. The case is being remanded for further development.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for residuals of left gastrocnemius surgery and associated left lower extremity posterior tibial nerve paralysis are being remanded due to inadequate VA examinations.

The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 was denied because no new and material evidence was submitted to reopen the claim, and the Board found that the cause of the amputation was not due to VA's carelessness or negligence.

The Board has decided that the propriety of a military drill pay adjustment from March 1, 2015 to June 1, 2015 needs further clarification due to uncertainty about when exactly the Veteran performed his training days in fiscal year 2011. The case is being sent back for additional verification.

The Veteran's cause of death is remanded due to the need for further development regarding his exposure to ionizing radiation and the precise location of his service in Japan. The Board also needs to determine if his squamous cell carcinoma was related to any potential exposure to ionizing radiation.

The Board denied service connection for low white blood cell disorder and thrombocytopenia, finding that the evidence did not support a relationship to service or presumed herbicide agent exposure.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant's authorized representative requested to withdraw the appeal before a decision was made.

The Veteran's claim of service connection for disability manifested by chronic back pain is granted. The Board finds that the Veteran's current back disorder had its onset in service and resolves doubt in favor of the Veteran.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for compliance with special procedural safeguards and the submission of updated financial information.

The Board dismissed the appeal as the appellant died during the pendency of the appeal and there is no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits.

The Veteran's claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) has been granted, and the issue is dismissed as moot.