Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's malaria with a history of splenomegaly is being remanded for further evaluation due to increased symptoms and the possibility of cerebral malaria.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been submitted to reopen the Veteran's claims for service connection for sinus problems and hematuria, as both decisions were final.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for reinstatement of her death pension benefits as she could not be recognized as the Veteran's surviving spouse due to remarriage.

The Board is remanding the case to obtain a copy of Dr. Thomas Smyrk's medical opinion/consultation letter from Mayo Clinic, which was requested by Dr. Romero at Cox Medical Center South. The VA physician will provide opinions on whether lung cancer was the primary site and if so, whether it metastasized from the liver.

The Board has referred the case to an Independent Medical Expert (IME) for an opinion regarding the relationship between herbicide exposure and the Veteran's squamous cell carcinoma of the left tonsil. The Veteran submitted additional argument in June 2011, requesting that the case be remanded for RO initial review of the additional evidence.

The Board determined that the Veteran's bilateral bunions and hallux valgus did not have a service origin, as they were first noted after his last period of active duty. The claim for sleep apnea was also denied.

The Board found that the Veteran did not have a current diagnosis of a chronic skin disorder, but reopened his claim based on new evidence. The decision is mixed as some issues are granted and others are denied.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for Chiari-Frommel Syndrome/Chiari Malformation, to include as secondary to his service-connected hiatal hernia, is denied. The evidence does not establish a medical relationship between the current disability and either service or service-connected hiatal hernia.

The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claim for defective vision due to missing VA treatment records and an addendum opinion from the April 2006 examiner.

The Board found that the additional dental disability was not caused by VA treatment, but rather coincidental to it. The Veteran's pre-existing conditions were aggravated by her own actions (clenching and bruxism), which is considered willful misconduct.

The Veteran received medical care at a private healthcare facility for right rib pain on February 14, 2007. The care was deemed necessary due to the nature of the condition and the Veteran's service-connected disabilities, as well as the unavailability of VA facilities.

The Veteran's claim for a TDIU is being remanded due to the need for additional development and medical inquiry.

The VA determined that the Veteran's service-connected shell fragment wound of the left lower extremity does not warrant a compensable evaluation, as it is manifested by minimal scarring and subjective complaints of pain and cramping.

The Veteran's polycythemia vera is found to be due to his inservice herbicide exposure, specifically Agent Orange. The Board finds that the evidence supports a finding of service connection for this condition.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim of service connection for bilateral otitis media, mastoidectomies, recurrent cholesteatoma and perforated eardrum. The Veteran's pre-existing ear condition was aggravated during his military service.

The Board has determined that the appellant did not have qualifying service in the United States Armed Forces and therefore is not a veteran for purposes of receiving benefits from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining private treatment records and clarifying the extent of his cold injury residuals.

The Veteran seeks service connection for a bilateral lower extremity nerve disorder, which he contends is related to his degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine. The Board has determined that additional development is needed and remands the case.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient reasons and bases for rejecting evidence potentially favorable to the Veteran, including questionable credibility of medical affidavits and inconsistencies in service records. The Veteran is requested to provide original copies or allow examination of the medical statements from Dr. Torrefranca, Dr. Alderete, and Dr. Cruz.

The Board found no evidence to support the Veteran's claim of residuals of a head injury related to his active service. The claims for pneumonia and lung damage were not addressed in this decision.