Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has decided to remand the case due to inadequate medical opinions and the need to address the Veteran's lay statements regarding his stomach symptoms.

The Veteran's service-connected left hip disabilities have increased in severity since the last examination, and he is required to undergo a VA examination to determine their current severity.

The Board has granted service connection for atelectasis, finding that the Veteran's respiratory disorder is related to his military service and exposure to burn pits. The decision also notes conflicting evidence regarding chronic hypoxia but finds it not connected to service.

The Veteran's spinal cord injury and related issues, including loss of sensation from neck down, loss of temperature, loss of genital sensation, left upper extremity weakness, pain, and spasticity, and right upper extremity weakness, were caused by VA medical treatment. The event was not reasonably foreseeable.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for diverticulitis and remanded the issue of service connection for a gastrointestinal disorder (other than sliding hiatal hernia and diverticulitis).

The Veteran's initial rating for insomnia was increased to 30 percent effective November 6, 2019. Prior to this date, the Veteran had a 10 percent rating.

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

The Board denied service connection for a dental disability for compensation purposes, finding no evidence of loss of substance of the body of the maxilla or mandible due to in-service trauma or bone disease. Service connection was granted for outpatient treatment purposes.,For TDIU prior to December 31, 2002, the Board found that while the Veteran had multiple service-connected disabilities, none met the schedular requirements for a TDIU.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for an apportionment of his VA compensation benefits, finding that it would cause undue hardship to him and thus not meet the requirements for a special or general apportionment.

The Board denied an increase in the amount of apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits to the appellant, finding that it would result in undue hardship on the Veteran.

The Veteran seeks to reenter a VR&E program for additional education and employment. The Board finds an additional functional capacity evaluation is needed due to the significant amount of time that has passed since his last review.

The Veteran's claim for an initial compensable rating prior to March 3, 2017, and in excess of 10 percent thereafter for bilateral foot calluses is being remanded due to the failure to notify the Veteran of scheduled VA examinations.

The Veteran's service connection claim for an equilibrium disability, manifested by dizziness, is granted as it is at least as likely as not that his current dizziness is causally related to his active military service.

The Board has granted an initial rating of 20 percent for left leg shin splints, finding that the Veteran's symptoms are analogous to a moderate knee or ankle disability.

Your appeal regarding your bilateral hearing loss has been dismissed due to the death of the Veteran. The Board does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate this matter as the appellant passed away during the pendency of the appeal.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to their death, and the case is no longer under jurisdiction.

The Board has remanded the case for further development regarding whether an overpayment of $3,404.55 in educational assistance benefits under the Post-9/11 GI Bill was properly created and for a determination on the Veteran's waiver of recovery request.

The Veteran's appeal for a higher initial evaluation of CVA was dismissed due to the death of the appellant.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate opinions regarding the onset of atrial fibrillation during service and whether it is aggravated by a service-connected condition. The Veteran will need a new VA examination.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate examination reports and additional development is required.