Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has remanded the claims for additional VA treatment records to be considered, and for issuance of a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC).

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding service connection for microcytic hyperchromic anemia, specifically addressing whether it is a congenital disease or defect and considering lay testimony about symptoms during and after service.

The Veteran's claim for additional dependency compensation for his stepchild, P.M., is denied as the child has already been recognized and compensated since December 2012.

The Veteran's claim for TDIU was previously remanded to obtain information about his employment and education history. The case is being returned to the RO for further action.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient opinions regarding whether the Appellant's misconduct in service was concurrent with a period of insanity, as defined by VA regulations.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an effective date prior to April 1, 2018, for the award of dependency benefits for her spouse. The Veteran did not submit a formal or informal claim seeking this benefit before March 13, 2018.

The Board has determined that the matter is not ripe for appellate review due to incomplete procedural steps, including notification requirements and financial information. The appeal will be remanded for further development.

The Board has remanded the case due to new evidence being added to the claims file and not previously considered by the RO. The Veteran's appeal for a compensable rating for trauma, coccygeal region is remanded, as well as the reopening of service connection for inguinal lymphadenopathy.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to inadequate compliance with previous remand instructions and a need for an addendum opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's insomnia disorder.

The Veteran's SMC at the housebound rate for right hip residuals is granted. The case is remanded for a rating in excess of 10 percent and TDIU prior to October 1, 2020.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a missed VA examination and requests that additional evidence be provided, including treatment records. A new VA examination will be scheduled for an appropriate clinician to determine if any respiratory condition is related to service or caused by a service-connected condition.

The Board denied service connection for a right hand disorder, including residuals of a right carpal boss removal, due to the lack of current diagnosis or functional impairment.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the etiology of the Veteran's claimed cognitive impairment and residuals of heat exhaustion. The Veteran needs a new examination by an appropriate clinician to provide an opinion on whether these conditions are related to his service.

The Veteran's left long finger condition, which resulted from a crush injury during service, does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under VA regulations. The current noncompensable rating is maintained as his symptoms do not warrant any higher evaluation based on limitation of motion.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to inadequate completion of prior remand directives, and additional development is required for a proper determination on service connection for gastrointestinal disabilities.

The Board has remanded the case due to a need for further examination and consideration of whether the Appellant's discharge constitutes a bar to VA benefits.

The Board found no evidence of negligence or fault on the part of VA in causing the Veteran's epididymitis and loss of right testicle, thus denying compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for nonservice-connected survivor's pension benefits due to her annual income exceeding the maximum allowable rate.

The Board found that the Veteran did not reasonably discharge his responsibility for supporting his dependent child, L.W., and granted an apportionment of $400.00 per month to the claimant on behalf of L.W. The appeal to terminate this apportionment was denied.

The Board has determined that the decision on appeal is legally inadequate due to incomplete notification and a pre-decisional duty to assist error. The claim will be remanded for further action.