Other conditions decisions — 2024

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for higher ratings for her left and right leg disabilities due to a lack of adequate reasons and bases in the September 2022 decision, specifically regarding the Veteran's December 2021 statement that her knee disabilities had worsened. The Veteran is required to be provided with an examination addressing the current severity of her bilateral leg disability.

The Veteran's POTS is rated at 60 percent from March 16, 2015. The Board also remanded the issue of TDIU.

The appeal is dismissed because the appellant passed away during the pendency of the appeal, and the Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate her claim for an earlier effective date.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the cause of the coccyx injury and whether it is related to service-connected disabilities. The Veteran's claim will be reconsidered with additional evidence and an addendum opinion.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's claim for service connection for a meningioma should be remanded due to an incomplete rating decision and failure to issue a Statement of the Case (SOC).

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection and rating determinations due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the relationship between her conditions and active service.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for the cause of his death and accrued benefits due to insufficient evidence supporting his exposure to herbicide agents in Vietnam, and because no pending claim existed at the time of his death.

The Board has granted service connection for colon cancer, liver cancer, and a gastrointestinal disorder. The Veteran's current conditions are deemed to be proximately caused by his now service-connected disabilities.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for left and right thumb disorders, finding that there was no evidence of a nexus between the current disabilities and active service.

The Board has remanded the case for a new VA examination to determine the etiology of the Veteran's back condition, as there are conflicting opinions in the record and missing STRs.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal, and the Board has dismissed it.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant requested to withdraw their appeal prior to a decision being made.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for a 60 percent rating for impairment of rectal sphincter control with fecal leakage is granted, but no earlier than June 5, 2017.,The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for TDIU is denied.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to an incomplete record from a private psychologist, Dr. Xenakis, who treated the Veteran during service and noted gastrointestinal issues.

The Veteran's initial and subsequent ratings for his back disability are denied, with the exception of a temporary 40% rating from October 26, 2016. The right knee disability is granted as secondary to service-connected back disability.

The Board has remanded the case due to conflicting medical opinions regarding the Veteran's left leg circulation disorder. The case will be reviewed again with a new examination and opinion on whether the condition is related to service-connected diabetes mellitus.

The Board has decided that the AOJ's July 2017 apportionment decision is remanded due to procedural issues and corrective action must be taken.

The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's left eye condition, which includes blindness, exotropia, optic atrophy, and retinal detachment. The decision finds that these conditions are related to his in-service injury while playing basketball.

The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's bilateral foot condition, finding that it is as likely as not incurred or worsened by his active military service.

The Veteran's claim for reimbursement of unauthorized non-VA emergency treatment provided on November 24, 2012, at PSMC was denied because the costs were a deductible and not covered by his health plan. The VA does not reimburse veterans for deductibles under 38 U.S.C. § 1725.