Other conditions decisions — 2023

The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant requested to withdraw it before a decision was made.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a left eye disability and mandible/TMJ syndrome, finding that there was no current disability other than refractive error for the left eye and insufficient evidence of a current mandible/TMJ disability.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for thickened bladder walls and prostate hypertrophy due to insufficient medical opinions addressing whether these conditions are related to his Gulf War service. The VA is instructed to obtain a new opinion that addresses both the pathophysiology and etiology of the conditions in the context of the Veteran's unique circumstances.

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

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for reimbursement of loans received while participating in a VR&E program, finding that VA is not obligated to reimburse because the loans were used for personal living expenses and not tuition.

The Board has remanded the case due to conflicting diagnoses and the need for clarification of the nature of the Veteran's disability, opinions that address secondary service connection, and the outstanding records. The Veteran is seeking service connection for a sleep disorder, including narcolepsy.

The Board dismissed the Veteran's claim of entitlement to reimbursement for medical care due to insufficient evidence and lack of cooperation from the Veteran.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the cause of the Veteran's ulcerative colitis and associated residuals, including bowel surgeries. A VA opinion is needed to determine if there is a relationship between the condition and service.

The Veteran's service-connected other specified trauma and stressor disorder, cannabis use disorder, and alcohol use disorder are rated at a 70 percent initial rating from September 7, 2015 until October 25, 2016. A 100 percent rating is granted effective October 25, 2016. SMC based on housebound status is also granted.

The appeal was dismissed due to the Veteran's death and there is no substitute appellant.

The Veteran's service connection claim for recurrent clear cell odontogenic carcinoma status post maxillectomy is granted as it falls under the direct service connection theory, not a presumption based on exposure to herbicides.

The Veteran's child, C.M., is recognized as his helpless child due to her permanent incapacity for self-support prior to the age of 18, based on significant neurological disabilities and impairments since early childhood.

The Veteran's service-connected Barrett's esophagus with anemia and upper and lower GI disorder is rated at 60 percent from October 25, 2019 to January 2, 2020. The Board found that the severity of his symptoms warranted this rating based on severe impairment of health.

The Board denied service connection for a left gluteal disorder and denied an increased rating for left thigh disability. The issue of TDIU prior to July 26, 2021 was also not resolved.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete records and the need for a VA medical opinion regarding the Veteran's exposure to contaminants during service.

The Veteran's claim for a reduction of his prostate cancer rating from 100% to 40% was remanded due to the lack of documentation regarding whether a hearing took place.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hip and knee disabilities due to insufficient examination findings. The Veteran is also seeking a total disability rating based on individual unemployability, which was withdrawn prior to transfer of the appeal.

The Board dismissed the claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a medical examination and additional evidence, as there is insufficient information on whether the Veteran's left arm disorder is related to service.

The Board has determined that the remand was not completed as required, and thus the case is being returned to the AOJ for further action.