Other conditions Board decisions

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral foot disabilities, finding that there was no evidence to support a relationship between his service-connected type 2 diabetes mellitus and his current foot conditions.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a lung disability, finding that there was no evidence linking his current condition to his military service.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to his death, and the case will be processed by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ).

The Board has denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a pulmonary disorder, including due to presumed exposure to Agent Orange. The evidence does not support a current diagnosis of such a condition and his reported symptoms have been contradicted by medical records.

The Veteran's appeals for increased ratings for chronic diarrhea and prurigo nodularis have been dismissed due to the Veteran withdrawing their appeal prior to a decision being made.

The Board has decided to remand the cases for further development and clarification regarding the Veteran's epididymitis rating and TDIU effective date.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a bilateral eye disability, including as due to service-connected hypertension. The evidence does not support an etiological link between any of his current bilateral eye disabilities and active service or service-connected hypertension.

The Board has ordered a new examination to determine the nature and cause of any diagnosed ulcer conditions, including whether they are related to service-connected disabilities.

The Board has remanded the case for an addendum VA opinion to address whether the Veteran had a bilateral lower extremity disability, excluding rheumatoid arthritis, that clearly and unmistakably pre-existed service and was not aggravated by service. The examiner is also asked to determine if each current disability had its onset during service or is otherwise related to service.

The Veteran's appeal for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) for the period between December 13, 2013 and April 5, 2019 was dismissed due to his death.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the Veteran's service-connected left upper back lipoma and its associated scar, as well as his neurological pain. Additional VA examinations are needed to address these issues.

The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claim for service connection for an autoimmune/connective tissue disorder, claimed as lupus, due to insufficient opinions regarding its etiology and relationship to service.

The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's death, and no compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for the residuals of a left knee arthroplasty can be granted as the appellant has passed away.

The Board denied service connection for a prostate disability, finding that the evidence does not support a link to active service or any event during service.

The Veteran's gastrointestinal conditions, including resection of the large intestine due to ulcerative colitis with toxic megacolon and gastroenteritis, are found to have begun during his service and are related thereto. Service connection is granted for these conditions.

The Board found that the overpayment of VA additional compensation benefits for a dependent spouse in the amount of $10,616.94 was properly created due to the Veteran's failure to promptly notify the RO of her divorce from her spouse.

The Veteran's service connection claim for bronchiectasis is remanded due to the need for a new VA examination to determine if his condition increased in severity during military service.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinions and a need for further examination.

The appeal was dismissed as the AOJ administratively reversed the denial and paid the claim for non-VA outpatient dental services provided to the Veteran on December 3, 2019.

The Board has determined that the January 2019 decision did not correctly apply the legal standard for determining whether the Veteran's schizoaffective disorder was incurred in or caused by service. The Board is therefore remanding the case to obtain an addendum opinion from a clinician to clarify the nature and etiology of the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disability.