Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient information regarding the cause of the Veteran's death, specifically whether liver cancer was a contributory cause. The VA will need to obtain additional medical records and provide an updated opinion on these issues.

The Board has granted service connection for AML and the cause of death due to AML, finding that the Veteran's exposure to herbicide agents in Vietnam is presumed. The Veteran was not rated at 100% disabled prior to his death.

The Veteran's cause of death, liver failure secondary to lymphoma, is granted as service-connected due to presumed exposure to herbicide agents during service.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for neuritis of the left supra-orbital nerve was denied. The Board also found that a separate rating for a neurological impairment of the left arm is not warranted.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for additional development and review of records, including private medical records from B.M.C. Hospital.

The Board has ordered the AOJ to address whether death pension benefits are warranted from February 1, 2009, through the present. The AOJ should consider any records in the income verification match file and issue a supplemental statement of the case if necessary.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a respiratory disorder is granted, and the appeal is remanded to determine if secondary service connection can be established.

The Board has remanded the case for further action, including adjudicating the Veteran's informal request for a TDIU and considering all pertinent evidence since the last decision.

The Board has remanded the case due to non-compliance with previous remand directives regarding a map from U-Tapao Royal Thai Air Force Base in 1968 and 1969 that contains a scale of distance.

The Veteran's invasive breast cancer is determined to have been caused by the VA provider's failure to properly diagnose and treat her, including prescribing Prempro without additional imaging due to her history of abnormal mammograms and dense breasts. The Board finds that this constitutes an error in judgment on the part of the VA provider.

The Board has remanded the claims of service connection for Lyme disease and arthritis due to inadequate medical opinions in the April 2017 VA examination. The Veteran is seeking service connection for these conditions, which he believes are related to his active duty service.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for recognition as the Veteran's surviving spouse due to a legal impediment, as she was already married and not divorced at the time of her attempted marriage in 1979.

The Board has remanded the case due to a need for clarification regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's skin disorder, specifically whether it is related to exposure to ionizing radiation, chemical exposures, or sun exposure. The Veteran must provide updated VA records and any private treatment records.

The Veteran's appeal for a higher rating for his service-connected Osgood Schlatter disease of the left knee has been denied. He was granted separate ratings for limited extension and instability, but not for a higher overall rating.

The Board has ordered additional medical examination and opinion to clarify the Veteran's history of meniscal injury in his right knee, as there is conflicting evidence from different examiners.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to an inadequate VA examination, and a new one must be conducted for service connection of a respiratory condition.

The Veteran's onychomycosis (toenail fungus) has been remanded for further evaluation due to the need for a new examination.

Your claim for service connection for bilateral parotid masses has already been decided in your favor with the grant of service connection for Warthin’s tumors.

The Veteran's currently diagnosed bilateral lower extremity varicose veins are related to active service and the Board has granted service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's death was not service-connected, and the appellant is over the age of 26 at the time her father died. Therefore, she is not eligible for Chapter 35 Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits.