Other conditions Board decisions

The VA denied the veteran's claim for service connection for lung problems/shortness of breath, finding no objective indications of a qualifying chronic disability associated with her Persian Gulf War service.

The Board has determined that the appellant is not a 'child' of the veteran for purposes of receiving DIC benefits, as he was older than 23 years old and legally married. Therefore, his claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death is denied.

The VA determined that the appellant's deceased husband did not have recognized service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. As a result, the appellant is denied eligibility for VA benefits based on claimed service.

The Board has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for gout, finding that there is no evidence of a chronic condition during active duty and noting the gap in time between discharge from military service and diagnosis of gout. The Board also found that there was no medical nexus linking current gout to military service.

The veteran's application for VA education benefits was denied as he did not meet the eligibility criteria under any of the available programs.

The veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of tendon lacerations to the right forearm with median nerve damage was granted, but an effective date earlier than July 8, 1999 is sought. The Board finds that the requirements are met for an even earlier effective date of July 12, 1993.

The case is being returned to the Regional Office for further verification of the veteran's service periods and scheduling a hearing if requested.

The Board found that the cause of the veteran's death, leukemia, is not related to his military service and denied the claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case due to additional development needed, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a left hand condition, finding that there is no evidence linking any current disability to her military service.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the determination that the appellant's discharge is a bar to VA benefits (exclusive of health care under Chapter 17, Title 38, United States Code).

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development due to incomplete medical records and unclear exposure history. The case will be reviewed by a VA examiner who specializes in pulmonary disorders.

The Board found that there is no current dental condition related to in-service trauma and denied the veteran's claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to the complexity of the issue, including a need for a comprehensive VA examination.

The appeal is being remanded for further development regarding the appellant's claim of recognition as the surviving spouse of the veteran for VA benefits. The specific legal requirements and evidence needed to substantiate this claim will be provided.

The veteran is seeking service connection for various conditions, including skin rashes and cysts, stomach disability, and diabetes mellitus, all potentially related to herbicide exposure during his Vietnam-era service. The Board has ordered additional development of the claims.

The veteran's application for enrollment in the VA medical health care system was denied due to his assignment to Priority Group 8, which is not eligible for enrollment as of January 17, 2003.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete medical records and a need for further examination to determine if the veteran's onychomycosis is related to his military service.

The veteran's application for enrollment in the VA medical healthcare system was denied as he did not meet the eligibility criteria and his income exceeded the threshold for priority group eight.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for retroactive educational benefits under Chapter 35, as her application was received more than one year after she completed the education.