Other conditions Board decisions

Your appeal for service connection for dizziness and lightheadedness has been dismissed due to the Veteran's death before a decision was made.

The Veteran's adopted sons R.W. and C.W. were added as dependents on his VA disability compensation award starting from March 15, 2000.,The Veteran's spouse W.W. was not eligible to be added prior to her divorce in April 1998.,The Veteran's spouse M.W. is entitled to additional dependency benefits since January 1999 and until April 2005.,The Veteran's spouse A.W. is entitled to additional dependency benefits starting from August 2005 until May 2012.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed because he requested to withdraw his appeal prior to the Board making a decision.

The Board has dismissed the appeals for earlier effective dates and service connection due to the Veteran's death.

The Veteran's eligibility for Post-9/11 GI Bill educational assistance benefits ended on August 20, 2018. The Board denied the claim as he did not qualify due to his eligibility period ending before his application.

The Board has granted an apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits to the appellant (the Veteran's then spouse) for the period from June 2020 to September 2020, in the amount of the dependency allowance.

The Board has dismissed the appeal as it does not have jurisdiction to review disputes related to contractual payment rates for medical services provided under Veterans Care Agreements (VCAs).

The Veteran's claim for additional VA educational assistance benefits under the Post-9/11 GI Bill as of March 18, 2020, was denied because she had already used up to 48 months of entitlement due to her prior usage of other education programs.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a psychiatric disability, finding that she did not meet the diagnostic criteria for a current psychiatric disability.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a pre-decisional error where the VA did not provide an audit of the Veteran's final compensation benefits payment, which could affect whether recoupment was proper. The AOJ is instructed to prepare and provide a detailed audit on the final payment issued to the Veteran for his compensation benefits.

The Board has granted service connection for left and right foot drop as secondary to the Veteran's service-connected low back disability, bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy, bilateral knee disabilities, and cervical spine disability.

The Veteran's appeals for service connection have been dismissed due to the withdrawal of his appeal by the Veteran.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for a higher rating for his left femur condition, finding that it did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under the applicable diagnostic code.

The appeal for payment of non-VA medical services provided on December 25, 2019 is dismissed because the claim was filed by a billing company that did not furnish the underlying medical services.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death, finding that there was no evidence linking his cancer to service or asbestos exposure.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal for service connection regarding a neck condition before the Board could make a decision.

The Board has remanded the claims of entitlement to service connection for gout of the hands and feet due to the submission of new evidence after the June 2010 denial.,VA is required to grant an earlier effective date for the award of service connection for OSA, but the Veteran's claim was not filed within one year prior to September 15, 2020.

Your claim for service connection for chronic right hip pain has been fully resolved in your favor, and the appeal is dismissed as there are no unresolved issues.

The Board has decided to remand the case for a new medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's glioblastoma brain cancer, as the previous opinions were inadequate and did not consider all relevant evidence.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the death of the appellant, and therefore has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this DIC claim.