Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has denied the claimant's request for a one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund due to lack of recognized active military service.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim of service connection for a sinus disorder, finding that there is no evidence linking his current condition to his military service.

The Board denied an effective date before November 7, 2003 for the grant of nonservice-connected pension and a rating higher than 40 percent for enucleation of the right eye. The case is being remanded to obtain VA records from Dr. Clearihue's treatment in Los Angeles.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's withdrawal of his appeal.

The Veteran's service connection claims for residuals of stitches under the left eye and residuals of a broken tooth are granted as his account of in-service injuries is found to be both competent and credible.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to missing VA treatment records from November to December 1987. The Veteran's claim will be handled in an expeditious manner.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to the RO for a Travel Board hearing and additional development. The issues include rating for fracture, right fifth metacarpal; TDIU; service connection for left hand disability; service connection for right hand disability; and special monthly compensation based on need for aid and attendance.

The Veteran's right patellofemoral syndrome is currently rated at 10 percent, effective from the date of the decision.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claim for a gynecological disorder due to her military service, including an elective tubal ligation and hysterectomy. The case is being returned for further development and consideration.

The Veteran's stuttering disorder is manifested by symptoms that are analogous to no more than moderate incomplete paralysis, and thus does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for a higher rate of Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1311(a)(3), finding that she was not entitled to such benefits as her husband died after January 1, 1993.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been submitted to reopen the Veteran's claims for service connection for prostatitis and a back injury. As such, these claims remain denied.

The Board found that the appellant's right elbow disability, manifested by ulnar nerve entrapment with mild weakness and decreased sensation in the little and ring finger, did not warrant a rating higher than 10 percent under Diagnostic Code 8516.

The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn, and the claims for increased rating for incomplete paralysis of the ninth (glossopharyngeal) cranial nerve and compensable rating for ptosis, left eye have been dismissed.

The Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for epithelial hyperplasia of the tongue was denied as his condition does not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on the evidence showing no speech impairment or other disabling symptoms.

The Board denied the appellant's claim as he is not considered a dependent child of the Veteran for VA purposes due to his legal marriage and age at which he became disabled.

The veteran's claim for nonservice-connected pension benefits is denied because they have had no service as an individual or a member of a group considered to have performed active military service.

The Veteran seeks service connection for squamous cell carcinoma at the base of tongue/oral pharynx, which he claims is due to exposure to ionizing radiation during military service. The appeal is remanded as further development is needed, including obtaining relevant medical records and preparing a dose estimate based on available methodologies.

The Board has ordered the Veteran's service personnel records to be obtained and reviewed. The Veteran is seeking pension benefits, but his service dates are unclear due to potential misrepresentation in the claims file. The case will be remanded for further development.

The Veteran's claim for an effective date prior to June [redacted], 2009, for payment of additional compensation benefits for her dependent spouse was denied as she did not provide the necessary information within one year of her marriage.