Other conditions decisions — 2023

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical evidence and potential missing VA treatment records. The Veteran needs a VA examination to determine if his bladder infection or residuals are related to service.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for skin hypopigmentation and joint swelling due to insufficient medical opinions provided in the May 2023 VA examinations. The Veteran is required to provide additional evidence or an adequate opinion regarding his service connection claims.

The Veteran's appeal for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) has been dismissed due to his death.

The Board has remanded the case due to new evidence received after a previous final decision, and will consider whether the appellant's character of discharge from service bars VA benefits and his entitlement to health care under Chapter 17.

The Board has decided to remand the case for a new psychiatric examination to determine if the appellant met VA's definition of insanity during service at the time he committed offenses leading to his discharge.

The Board has remanded the case due to inconsistencies between the evidence discussed in the November 2016 Statement of the Case and the actual evidence of record. The Veteran's claim for nonservice-connected pension benefits is being returned for further development.

The Veteran's remains are unavailable for establishing eligibility for a memorial headstone or marker due to their recovery and identification, thus the claim is denied.

The Board has granted service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death, finding that his CLL was presumptively caused by his in-service exposure to herbicide agents.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient reasons and bases for its findings regarding the severity of the Veteran's gastrointestinal disability prior to May 25, 2022. The case is now pending for further examination.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal regarding the April 1995 decision denying service connection for cocaine abuse (previously claimed as drug dependency). The Board dismissed the appeal.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a duty to assist error and an issue regarding service connection for cause of death. The Veteran's cause of death is related to his in-service exposure to herbicide agents, but the medical opinion provided was deemed insufficient.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's death, as claims do not survive their deaths.

The Board denied service connection for squamous cell carcinoma of the right lung, finding that it was not related to in-service exposure and did not meet the criteria for presumptive service connection.

The appeal for benefits under the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) and a Level 2 stipend has been dismissed due to the Veteran's death.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial compensable rating for his right lung nodules, finding that the evidence did not show FEV-1 of 71 to 80 percent predicted or DLCO (SB) 66 to 80 percent predicted.

The Board has determined that the cause of the Veteran's death is related to his military service, specifically an adjustment disorder with depressed mood. However, further medical opinion is needed to determine if this condition was a result of military service or occurred during service.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for pancreatic cancer and a total disability rating based on individual unemployability has been dismissed due to the Veteran's death.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient information regarding the Veteran's employment status and income from managing a mobile home park. The Veteran needs to provide details about their employment, including pay records and contact information for the mobile home park.

The Board denied service connection for chronic back pain as there was no evidence linking the condition to active military service or a service-connected disability.

The Board denied the appellant's appeal, finding that his character of service was dishonorable due to AWOL and he is not entitled to VA benefits other than healthcare.