Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of substantial compliance with previous remands, including failing to obtain an examination and considering new evidence.

The Board has remanded the case due to non-compliance with previous remand orders and a need for further examination.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant requested to withdraw it before a decision was made.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral eye conjunctivitis as there is no current diagnosis of chronic conjunctivitis in the record.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for his elbow disabilities have been denied. The criteria for higher ratings under the applicable diagnostic codes were not met.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of medical expenses at UMassMemorial Medical Center and UMassMemorial Medical Group on December 21, 2016 because the treatment was not for an emergent condition.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for adenoid cystic carcinoma has been dismissed due to the death of the appellant. The Board does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate this case as the appellant is deceased.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for monoclonal gammopathy and a high white cell blood count was dismissed due to the subsumption of his July 2004 rating decision by the November 2006 Board decision. The motion for revision on the basis of clear and unmistakable error (CUE) in the May 2012 TDIU denial is also dismissed as it pertains to a final decision.

The Board found that the Veteran's discharge was due to willful and persistent misconduct, resulting in a bar to VA benefits for his period of service from July 1982 to November 1984.

The Veteran's spouse, who was substituted as the appellant after the Veteran's death, died during the appeal process. The Board has dismissed the claim due to lack of jurisdiction because the appellant cannot continue the appeal.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for chronic myelogenous leukemia (leukemia) as there is no evidence that it began during service or is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The most probative evidence does not support a finding of service connection.

The Veteran's appeal for a higher rating of left thumb degenerative joint disease remains pending. The Board has found substantial compliance with the remand directives regarding the left thumb appeal, but TDIU is still being addressed due to the need for additional VA examinations.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to incomplete Vet Center records and a need for an addendum opinion regarding the Veteran's personal assault/MST claim and its relationship to her bladder disability.

The Board has remanded the DIC claim due to a lack of readable and legible unit records from the Veteran's service period in India and Burma. The RO is instructed to obtain these records and any relevant private treatment records.

The Board has remanded the cases for further development to determine if the overpayment of VA disability compensation benefits in the amount of $3,498.52 was validly created and whether a waiver of recovery is warranted.

The Veteran's human papillomavirus has been rated at a non-compensable level, but the Board has granted an initial rating of 10 percent due to the need for continuous treatment.

The appeal for the appellant to be recognized as the surviving spouse of the Veteran for VA purposes has been dismissed due to her death during the pendency of the appeal.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for a hematologic disability, including MDS and AML, due to exposure during service as an x-ray specialist. The TDIU claim is also being remanded.

The Veteran's appeal of the apportionment of his VA disability compensation benefits on behalf of his former spouse, L.K., from August 1, 2013, to February 25, 2014 is denied as there was no undue hardship caused by the apportionment.

The Board has decided that the factual record is unclear and needs to be further developed, including obtaining additional records from the Veteran's military service and VA treatment records. The decision on whether the Veteran can establish service connection for his neck disorder will be reconsidered after these records are obtained.