Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete service records and a need for further verification of the Veteran's lightning strike during service. The appellant seeks service connection for cause of the Veteran's death, which is related to his alleged lightning strike.

The Board dismissed the appeal as the Appellant withdrew it, noting that an earlier effective date had been granted in a higher-level review rating decision.

The Board denied service connection for left and right hip disabilities, finding no evidence of a nexus to service or service-connected conditions.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial compensable rating for partial loss of right mandible, finding that his symptoms did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under either the old or revised version of Diagnostic Code 9902.

The Board granted service connection for squamous cell carcinoma and Grover's disease, effective from May 29, 2018, with a rating of 100 percent. The Veteran requested an earlier effective date, which the Board granted as March 26, 2016.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a dental disability and a rib disability, finding that there was no evidence of in-service trauma or disease resulting in current disabilities.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for squamous cell carcinoma of the right tonsillar fossa, finding that there was no evidence to support a link between his condition and his in-service exposure to Agent Orange or any other service-connected conditions.

The Board denied the Veteran's appeal as to whether her March 7, 2017 notice of disagreement was timely received in response to a March 2015 rating decision denying reopening of her claim for service connection for fibromatosis status-post gastrojejunostomy. The Board found that the NOD was not timely filed due to the presumption of regularity applying and no clear evidence showing VA officials failed to properly discharge their duties.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's right elbow disability is secondary to his service-connected right forearm disability. The Veteran needs to provide information about any VA treatment he received and obtain releases for private providers who may have relevant records.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate examination opinions and further development is needed.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's claim for a TDIU before September 21, 2017 is not fully addressed and needs to be remanded to obtain additional private treatment records.

The Veteran's eye disability, diagnosed as convergence insufficiency of the left eye, is granted. The Board finds that this condition was incurred in service and affords the benefit of doubt to the Veteran.,Hyperlipidemia has not been shown to be a disability for VA benefits purposes.

The Board has remanded the case due to procedural issues and the need for additional evidence, including medical documentation of incapacity prior to age 18 and financial information from all parties involved.

The Veteran's atrioventricular heart block is currently rated at 30 percent, and the Board finds that his symptoms do not warrant a higher rating based on the current evidence.

The Board denied the reduction of compensation benefits from 40% to 10%, finding that the reduction was proper and thus created a valid debt.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for left achilles or retrocalcaneal bursitis, finding that the evidence did not support a link between his current condition and in-service jungle rot.

The Board has remanded the case due to procedural issues and the need for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records.

The Board has decided to remand the claim of service connection for myasthenia gravis, which was previously denied due to lack of a medical opinion linking it to exposure at Camp LeJeune. The case is sent back for further evaluation.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinions and a need for further development regarding the Veteran's skin condition.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the Veteran's non-appearance at a VA examination, and requests additional information and evidence.