Other conditions Board decisions

The Board denied the claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death, finding that there was no evidence linking his death to his military service.

The Board found that the veteran's death was not caused by a service-connected disability and denied the claim for service connection for cause of death.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA death benefits because she did not provide valid documentation of her husband's military service.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA pension benefits as his only recognized military service was with the Philippine Scouts from May 1946 to March 1949, which is not qualifying service for VA pension purposes.

The appellant is not a veteran and does not meet the legal requirements for basic eligibility for VA benefits.

The Board found that the appellant is not shown to be permanently incapable of self-support due to mental or physical defect at attaining the age of 18 years, and thus does not meet the requirements for establishing entitlement to VA benefits as a child of the veteran.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for the cause of death, finding that there was no evidence linking the veteran's cancer to his service-connected disability or showing that it resulted from an injury suffered in line of duty. The Board also found that the service-connected disability did not contribute to the veteran's death.

The Board denied the appellant's request to reopen his claim for basic eligibility for VA benefits due to lack of new and material evidence, as all submitted evidence was found to be cumulative or not relevant to his eligibility.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA death benefits based on her spouse's service, finding that he had no recognized military service with the Armed Forces of the United States.

The Board has remanded the case due to the veteran's request for a personal hearing.

The Board has ordered further development due to the need for clarification of evidence regarding the date and etiology of the veteran's cardiovascular disease, including hypertensive vascular disease. The case is being remanded back to the RO for additional review.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for right ulnar nerve neuritis, due to subluxating ulnar nerve at the elbow, post operative, major hand is being remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals. The appeal also includes a request for an extra schedular rating in exceptional cases of unusual disability or marked interference with employment.

The Board has ordered further development due to pending requests for evidence and clarification. The case is now being remanded to the RO for additional medical records and an orthopedic examination.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA) has determined that the veteran's claim for a clothing allowance under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1162 for the year 2000 was denied due to his use of sunscreen, which is not considered sufficient to cause damage to his clothes.

The Board found that the veteran did not incur an additional disability secondary to surgery at a VA facility, which occurred in March 1965.

The Board has determined that the veteran's residuals of a chronic sternal wound infection with complications were incurred as a result of coronary artery bypass surgery at a VA medical facility and are not necessary consequences of treatment. As such, compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 is granted.

The veteran's appeal has been dismissed due to his death.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral vitreous floaters originated during his active military service and grants service connection for this condition.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of a back injury, residuals of a head injury, and PTSD. The evidence submitted since the December 1992 RO decision was not considered new and material to reopen these claims.

The veteran is seeking to have his previously assigned total disability based on individual unemployability (TDIU) rating restored. The case has been remanded for a Board videoconference hearing at the RO.