Other conditions decisions — 2023

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection of left and right leg disabilities, as well as gastrointestinal disability, due to secondary service-connected conditions or herbicide exposure. The claims are pending further development.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for T-cell lymphoma and mycosis fungoides, finding that there is no evidence linking his condition to military service in Djibouti.

The Veteran's claim for a total disability rating due to individual unemployability is being remanded because new evidence has been submitted and the AOJ has not reviewed it. The Veteran was notified of this, but did not waive AOJ consideration.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinion regarding whether the left eye infection began during active duty.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current epididymitis is related to his active service, granting service connection for this condition.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete information regarding the Veteran's TDIU claim. The AOJ is instructed to request a completed VA Form 21-8940 from the Veteran and obtain his employment and education history.

The Board denied compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for the Veteran's heart disability, finding that VA treatment was not careless or negligent and that the events were not reasonably foreseeable.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for an earlier effective date of August 8, 2016, for special monthly pension based on aid and attendance. The decision found that the Veteran was not entitled to this benefit prior to his claim being submitted in June 2016.

The Veteran's claim for retroactive payment of additional benefits for his dependent child, J.H., who attended school after turning 18 years old is denied. The effective date is not established as the claim was filed outside of the one-year window required by VA regulations.

The Veteran's claim for SMC based on aid and attendance or housebound status was denied because he does not require regular assistance due to his service-connected schizoaffective disorder. The claim for nonservice-connected pension benefits was dismissed as moot since the Veteran is already receiving a 100% disability rating.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a need for an addendum VA medical opinion regarding the Veteran's claimed inguinal hernia.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral eye condition, finding that there is no evidence of an etiological relationship between his current disabilities and military service.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal, so the case is dismissed.

The Veteran's surviving spouse died before the compensation was dispersed, and no additional accrued benefits are due to the appellant as her child. The claim is denied.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for right and left leg disabilities, finding that there was no evidence to support a link between his current disabilities and his in-service exposure to lead. The Board also found no other medical evidence linking these disabilities to service.

The Veteran's thoracic spine disability was granted an increased rating to 40 percent from November 21, 2016 through October 28, 2022.

The Board denied service connection for the Veteran's cause of death, metastatic breast cancer, finding that there was no evidence linking the condition to in-service herbicide exposure. The Board also found that the evidence did not support a link between the Veteran's exposure to carcinogens/dioxins and his manifestation of breast cancer many years after service.

The Board has denied a compensable rating for the Veteran's left little finger fracture residuals and has remanded the service connection issues for further examination.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient information regarding the Veteran's drill pay in FY 2013 and the amounts recouped by VA.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a lack of nerve conduction studies in the previous VA examination, and thus another examination is needed to assess the severity of the Veteran's left lower extremity paresthesias.