Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran withdrew his appeal, so the case is dismissed.

The Board has dismissed the claim for service connection for myasthenia gravis as secondary to epilepsy because the Veteran died during the appeal process.

The Board dismissed the appeal as the Veteran did not file a timely Substantive Appeal for the issue of adding S.D.G. as his dependent to his VA disability compensation.

The Veteran's appeal for a compensable rating for bilateral posterior subcapsular cataract and left eye retinal detachment is denied. The Board has also REMANDED the issue of compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for headaches due to his August 2011 to September 2012 eye surgeries.

The Board denied service connection for rhabdomyolysis and hyperkalemia related to it, as well as compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for both conditions due to the Veteran's VA-prescribed medication (statins/Simvastatin). The Board found that there was no evidence of negligence or carelessness on the part of VA in prescribing the medication.

The Veteran's lymphedema has been granted a 20 percent disability rating for the entire appeal period, which is the minimum compensable rating under Diagnostic Code 5201.

The Board has found that the Veteran's claims file does not contain all medical records from his July 1989 VA hospitalization and that the pertinent VA opinion of record was inadequate. The AOJ is instructed to obtain these missing records and issue a new medical opinion.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of peripheral retinal degeneration, and therefore service connection for this condition is denied.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's chronic back pain, with functional loss, is at least as likely as not related to his service and has granted service connection for this condition.

The Board denied service connection for ulcerative colitis (UC) as the evidence did not show that it was incurred or aggravated by service.

The appeal was dismissed due to the death of the appellant, and no service connection decision is made.

The Veteran's application for a clothing allowance due to a back brace was denied because it was not submitted before the August 1 deadline.

The Board denied pension benefits from January 30, 2013 to December 31, 2017 due to income exceeding the maximum annual pension rate. Pension was granted from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2019.

The Board denied the Veteran's challenge to the creation of an overpayment and his application for a waiver of the debt, finding that he did not establish a sole administrative error on VA's part.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's recurrent peri-anal abscesses were manifestations of his Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis during service. The case will be returned for further development and an addendum opinion from a clinician.

The Board denied an earlier effective date for DIC benefits, finding that the presumption of regularity held and there was no clear evidence to rebut it. The Appellant argued she never received notification of a November 1997 rating decision denying her petition to reopen her claim for service connection for cause of death.

The appeal was dismissed because the Veteran did not provide specific information about what issue he wanted to appeal or which decision he was disputing.

The Board has denied service connection for left tympanic membrane perforation and an initial compensable rating for right tympanic membrane perforation. The claim for otitis media is remanded due to a duty-to-assist error.

The Board found that the Veteran's net worth did not exceed the limit for pension benefits, including special monthly pension based on the need for regular aid and attendance. The decision is granted.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for a left eye condition, entitlement to an extraschedular evaluation for service-connected right leg DVT, and entitlement to TDIU due to issues with scheduling of examinations and potential need for additional evidentiary development.