Other conditions decisions — 2023

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error. The AOJ should attempt to associate the Veteran's records of private care with his VA file.

The Veteran's appeal to the Board was received more than one year following the August 2021 AOJ decision. The case is remanded due to errors in notification and medical decisions.

The Veteran's DIC claim for service connection for cause of death is remanded due to the lack of private treatment records. The DIC claim under 38 U.S.C. § 1318 remains denied as the Veteran did not meet the criteria for receiving benefits.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal before a decision was made, so the case is dismissed.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for DIC because no new and relevant evidence was received to show that she had remarried or that the Veteran's death was related to his active service.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to an issue with the timing of a claim for burial and funeral expenses, which was not timely filed within two years after the Veteran's death. The case is being returned to the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) to attempt to locate or rebuild the lost claims folder.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for benign prostatic hyperplasia, finding that there is not an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence to support the claim. The Veteran's current condition is not related to his active service or any in-service injury, event, or disease.

The Veteran's ambulance expenses incurred on July 14, 2019 for emergency medical treatment due to a motorcycle accident are approved and reimbursable under VA policies.

Your claim for service connection for the residuals of a cerebral vascular accident has been granted, but this decision does not affect any other pending claims or benefits.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for the award of a 40 percent rating for dyspepsia is granted. The claim for TDIU from August 27, 2003 through August 21, 2014 is denied.

The Board denied an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for right Achilles tendon rupture, finding that the Veteran's disability only included moderate limitation of motion.

The Veteran's claim for an initial disability rating in excess of 10 percent for residuals of hepatocellular carcinoma is being remanded due to the failure to substantially comply with June 2019 remand directives. The AOJ will attempt to reschedule a VA examination, and if necessary, conduct further development.

The Veteran's recurrent external genital warts were not rated as compensable due to the lack of coverage exceeding 5% of his total body or exposed areas, and no systemic therapy was prescribed over the period on appeal.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to missing VA and non-VA medical records. The appellant must provide copies of any available records, and the AOJ will attempt to obtain the missing records.

The Board has granted an effective date of August 21, 2014 for a 50 percent rating for uterine fibroids/leiomyomas and cyst, status post hysterectomy, bilateral salpingectomy/oophorectomy. The Veteran also received SMC on account of anatomical loss of a creative organ from the same date.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of medical records that would determine if the appellant needs aid and attendance or housebound benefits, which could affect her DIC rate.

The Veteran's left leg disabilities did not prevent him from engaging in substantially gainful employment prior to June 30, 2022.

The Board has decided to remand the claims for a skin rash, essential tremors, and TDIU due to service-connected disabilities. The RO must review the current evidence before making a decision.

The Board has granted service connection for IgA nephropathy and peripheral edema of the left and right lower extremities, finding that these conditions are proximately due to the Veteran's service-connected allergic rhinitis and hypertensive heart disease, respectively.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's spinal injury, claimed as tetraplegia, was incurred during his active-duty service and is not due to willful misconduct. Therefore, service connection for this condition is granted.