Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete examination and lack of recent VA treatment records. The Veteran's B-12 deficiency needs to be evaluated by a physician.

The Board has granted nonservice-connected death pension benefits from January 2007 to January 31, 2008. The appellant's income was less than the applicable maximum annual pension rate (MAPR) during this period.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for shin splints were denied. The initial evaluations for left and right knee tendonitis, as well as cervical and lumbosacral strain, have been granted at a 10% evaluation.

The Veteran is seeking an extension of the eligibility period for educational assistance under the Montgomery GI Bill due to mental disability after his father's passing. The Board has ordered additional development, including obtaining relevant medical records from a physician who treated him for anxiety.

The Veteran's TDIU claim is being remanded for additional development, including a review of his service-connected disability and educational/training history to determine if he can obtain substantially gainful employment.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including scheduling new VA examinations and obtaining relevant medical records. The issues of increased ratings for his service-connected fractures and hearing loss are also being addressed.

The Board has determined that additional development is necessary before the claims can be decided. Specifically, a VA examination is needed to assess the Veteran's deteriorated eyesight and left knee disability.

The VA has denied the appellant's claim for an increased rating and service connection for a skin disorder, finding that his fungal infection of the groin and buttocks does not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation.

The Veteran does not have current right or left shin splint disabilities, and the Board finds his claims for service connection to be denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund due to a lack of qualifying service in the United States Armed Forces.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's annual income exceeded the maximum annual pension rate, thus denying his claim for nonservice-connected disability pension benefits.

The Board denied the appellant's claims for increased apportionment benefits and nonservice-connected death pension benefits, finding no tenable legal error in the determination of the amount awarded to her children.

The Veteran's service-connected residuals of a gunshot wound to the right side of the chest with hemothorax and retained foreign body do not meet the criteria for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent. The Board also found that there is no evidence of unemployability due to his service-connected disabilities.

The case is being remanded for further development, including a TBI examination and consideration of separate ratings for residuals.

The Veteran's spouse, the appellant, was not recognized as a surviving spouse for purposes of VA death pension benefits due to separation from the Veteran without fault on her part.

The Veteran's service-connected traumatic aphakia of the right eye, corneal sclera laceration is currently rated at 30 percent and does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Veteran's gynecomastia disability is rated as 0 percent disabling under Diagnostic Code 7628, and the Board denied an increased rating greater than 0 percent.

The Veteran's right hand disability has been characterized by pain when gripping objects with some flare-up pain; full movement of the fingers and thumb were observed upon examination, but ankylosis of any digit has not been shown. The criteria for a rating in excess of 20 percent have not been met.

The Veteran's appeal for an increased rating for bilateral conjunctivitis has been dismissed due to the death of the appellant.

The Board found that the Veteran's currently diagnosed respiratory disorder is not related to service, including as secondary to asbestos exposure. Therefore, the claim for service connection was denied.