Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's anemia was found to not meet the criteria for a rating in excess of 10 percent from March 14, 2014, to October 25, 2018, and did not meet the criteria for a rating in excess of 30 percent beginning October 25, 2018. The Board found that the Veteran's anemia was not severe enough to warrant higher ratings under either the old or new rating criteria.

The Veteran's diaphragm paralysis and nerve damage due to surgery are being remanded for further evaluation, including a new VA examination. The TDIU claim is also being remanded as it is inextricably intertwined with the rating assigned for his disability.

The claims for service connection and TDIU from April 1, 2015 have been granted by a VA rating decision dated April 2020. The Board has dismissed the appeal due to lack of jurisdiction as the claims are moot.

The Board has determined that the matter is not ripe for appellate review due to procedural issues and remanded for further action.

The appeal is dismissed due to the appellant's death, and no service connection was granted.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinion regarding the cause of death and exposure to herbicides.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for a waiver of overpayment of VA pension benefits, finding that recovery would not be against equity and good conscience due to the Veteran's financial strain but also noting that he was at fault in creating the debt. The decision did not address service connection issues.

The Veteran's appeal for increased ratings was dismissed due to his death, and no service connection issues were addressed.

The Veteran's overpayment claim is being remanded to address the validity of the debt, specifically whether it was properly created based on VA regulations.

The Board has remanded the case due to unclear medical records regarding whether the Veteran's loss of teeth other than tooth #29 is related to service, including an in-service trauma. The VA examiner will need to provide a clear opinion on causation and aggravation.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for nonservice-connected disability pension benefits as he did not have qualifying active military service during a period of war.

The Veteran withdrew their appeal before the Board could make a decision, so the case is dismissed.

The Board denied a schedular rating in excess of 10 percent for the Veteran's pelvic disability, finding that her hip flexion and abduction did not meet criteria for higher ratings due to functional loss. The Veteran retains pain but does not have ankylosis or other disabling conditions.

The Board has remanded the claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities as the Veteran did not complete the required VA Form 21-8940, which is necessary to assess his eligibility for TDIU.

The Veteran's aerophagia with irritability of the colon is rated at a 30 percent disability rating, which is the maximum allowed under the applicable rating criteria.

The Board denied service connection for cholangiocarcinoma, finding that the Veteran's condition is not related to his military service or exposure to herbicide agents.

The Board has remanded the issue of whether the appellant's discharge from service is a bar to VA benefits due to incomplete personnel records. The case will be reviewed again with additional searches for relevant documents.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to outstanding VA and private medical records that need to be obtained. The Veteran's left eye disability is being reviewed for compensation under Section 1151 of the U.S.C.

The Veteran's claims for hypertension service connection and a rating in excess of 30 percent for right eye conjunctivitis with keratoconus from February 1, 2018 are remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for a disability manifested by weakness, fatigability, and irritability has been withdrawn. The issue is no longer in appellate status as the claim was reopened on new evidence.