Other conditions Board decisions

The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's death, and no service connection issues were decided.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to a pre-decisional error regarding the authorization of care provided after June 5, 2019. The AOJ needs to clarify the parameters of the authorization and its overlap with community care jurisdiction.

The Veteran's appeal for medical reimbursement for non-VA treatment from June 29, 2019, to June 30, 2019, is dismissed due to his death. The underlying issue has been resolved by VHA.

Your appeal for payment or reimbursement of non-VA medical expenses has been dismissed due to the Veteran's death.

The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's residuals of a gunshot wound to the left upper arm, finding that this condition is related to his active military service.

The appeal is being remanded due to the Veteran not receiving a copy of his March 2020 VA Form 9, which was part of his substantive appeal. The case will be returned for full compliance with previous remand directives and for the issuance of a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC).

The Board has remanded the cases for additional development due to the need for medical opinions regarding the etiology of the Veteran's sleep disorder and chronic obstipation, as well as the severity of his service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran's cause of death, colon cancer, was not found to be service-connected or related to exposure to herbicide agents. The Board denied the claim for service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death.

The Veteran's overpayment of VA compensation benefits due to concurrent receipt of drill pay in fiscal years 2013 and 2014 is being remanded for the RO to provide the Veteran with a letter from the Debt Management Center, obtain his waiver of VA compensation, and obtain DFAS records reflecting drill days and pay.

The Board has remanded the case due to a failure to follow proper procedures for obtaining Federal employment records, and to obtain the Veteran's complete employment history.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient examination reports and incomplete medical records, particularly those related to the Veteran's claimed recurrent cerebrovascular disability.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's residuals of left biceps injury are related to his active-duty service and grants service connection for this condition.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for benefits under 38 U.S.C. § 1805 for spina bifida, finding no evidence of a clinical diagnosis or treatment for this condition in her medical records.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the Veteran's claimed left leg condition, which is alleged to be secondary to her service-connected left knee injury. The Veteran needs a new VA examination to determine if she has a current left leg condition and whether it is related to her service-connected disability.

The Board denied service connection for right hip disorder and left hip disorder, finding no evidence of a nexus between the conditions and active service.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence linking the Veteran's polycythemia vera to his exposure to Agent Orange during service. The appellant is required to obtain a clarifying medical opinion from the Veteran's treating physician or a VA medical opinion if necessary.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for a rating in excess of 20 percent for his left leg disability and for entitlement to TDIU due to conflicting medical evidence regarding flare-ups, inadequate examination findings, and changes in VA musculoskeletal rating criteria.

The Board has granted compensation for right hip nerve damage caused by the Veteran's November 2012 hip replacement surgery, finding that it was not reasonably foreseeable and thus meeting the criteria under 38 U.S.C. § 1151.

The Veteran's right forearm disorder is being remanded for additional examination and consideration of the evidence. The Board will consider all submitted evidence, including SSA records.

The Board has decided that additional development is needed for the Veteran's TDIU claim, including obtaining SSA records. The case will be returned to the RO for further action.