Other conditions Board decisions

The Board is remanding the case to allow for additional development of the record, including obtaining relevant VA records and contacting A. W., the appellant's mother, regarding her knowledge concerning the events surrounding the payment of DIC benefits.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for chest pain and skin rash, finding no new and material evidence to reopen the latter claim.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a skin disorder of the hands and a respiratory disorder, including bronchiectasis. The decision also dismissed his claim for a compensable evaluation for tinea pedis.

The Board has determined that the evidence received since the June 1994 RO decision is not new and material, thus denying the veteran's request to reopen his claim for service connection for hair loss as a result of exposure to herbicides.

The Board has determined that the veteran's dysthymic disorder does not warrant an evaluation in excess of 70 percent, and his claim for a total rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability is denied.

The Board has determined that the appellant's spouse did not have qualifying military service, and therefore, she is not eligible for VA benefits.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for intermittent exotropia due to new and material evidence provided since the last denial in July 1995. The VA examiner concluded that the veteran's eye disability was a natural progression of his pre-service condition, but also noted that recent physical examination showed continued presence of eye problems including exotropia.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of service connection for chorioretinitis and uveitis, with blindness, as well as his claim for benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for these conditions.

The Board found that the veteran's July 5, 1973 claim for VA disability pension reasonably raised the issue of entitlement to compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 and awarded an effective date of July 5, 1973.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for basic eligibility for VA benefits due to a lack of recognized service in the United States Armed Forces.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral foot disorder, finding that there was no competent evidence relating the current disability to service.

The VA denied the appellant's claim as her late husband did not have certified military service in the United States Armed Forces, including service with the Philippine Commonwealth Army or recognized guerrillas.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected right knee disorder, finding that the disability did not meet the criteria for a higher than 10 percent rating.

The Board has assigned a 10 percent rating for the veteran's compression deformity at T7, effective from February 1994. The disability is currently manifested by subjective complaints of pain without significant limitation of motion.

The veteran is seeking an earlier effective date for the assignment of a 20 percent rating for his service-connected left toe disorder, which was granted in November 2000. The RO assigned a November 4, 2000, effective date based on the medical evidence showing that the criteria for the 20 percent evaluation were met.

The Board has determined that the veteran's Sjogren's syndrome was incurred in service and granted service connection for this condition.

The veteran seeks an earlier effective date for service connection and a separate compensable evaluation for tardive dyskinesia, which he claims is related to his service-connected schizophrenia.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals has denied the appellant's claim for death benefits as she was not recognized as the veteran's surviving spouse due to her divorce from him prior to his death.

The Board has denied the claim of service connection for a left buttock disability, finding no current evidence of such disability and concluding that any reported symptoms are not related to military duty.

The Board has denied the veteran's claim as there is no evidence of a head injury in service or current residuals thereof. The preponderance of the evidence does not support the veteran's contention that he currently suffers from residuals of a head injury incurred during his period of active service.