Radiculopathy & sciatica Board decisions

The Veteran's hypertension has been rated at 10 percent since the grant of service connection. The Board finds that additional development is needed to determine if a higher rating is warranted.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's left lower extremity sciatica warrants a 40 percent evaluation since April 21, 2008.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) for scheduling a hearing before a member of the Board at the RO.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and a videoconference hearing.

The Board granted service connection for radiculopathy of the left lower extremity and remanded the remaining issues. The Veteran's claims for peripheral neuropathy of the left upper extremity, cervical spine disability, and acquired psychological disorder (other than PTSD) as secondary to service-connected lumbosacral strain were all granted.

The Veteran's claims for higher ratings for tinnitus, bilateral hearing loss, hypertension, status-post discectomy and laminectomy with herniated nucleus pulposus at L4-5, and radiculopathy of the right lower extremity were denied as there is no legal basis upon which to award separate schedular ratings for each ear or a higher schedular rating for tinnitus.

The Board has ordered the case to be remanded for additional development, including issuing a statement of the case on the issue of entitlement to TDIU. The Veteran will have an opportunity to appeal this decision if he chooses.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including a VA examination to assess the severity of the Veteran's service-connected low back disability and right lower extremity radiculopathy. The appeal is now pending again with the Department of Veterans Affairs.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient reasons and bases for denying service connection, specifically regarding continuity of symptoms since service. The Veteran's VA treatment records post-November 2012 are requested.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's service connection claims for various conditions, including a back disorder and right shoulder disorder. However, after reviewing all submitted evidence, the Board finds that these claims are not substantiated by the evidence of record.

The Veteran's claims are being remanded due to the need for a Board hearing before a Veterans Law Judge at the RO.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of bilateral gynecomastectomy has been reopened and granted. His TDIU claim is also granted, with a rating of 10% for his back disability.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for his degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine and radiculopathy of the left sciatic nerve were denied as there is no evidence of intervertebral disc syndrome or ankylosis, which would warrant higher ratings under the General Rating Formula for Diseases and Injuries of the Spine.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings were denied as his conditions did not warrant a higher rating based on the current evidence of record.

The Veteran's appeal was granted, with a rating of 30 percent for cervical spine IVDS with arthritis and associated left upper extremity radiculopathy. Effective dates were established for the service connection awards.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional examinations and consideration of his claims.

The Board has remanded the case for a VA addendum medical opinion to address whether the Veteran's sciatic nerve condition and bilateral leg condition are related to military service, including a lightning strike during ACDUTRA.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have right lower extremity radiculopathy that is caused or aggravated by his service-connected back disorder.

The Board finds that there is no current evidence of radiculopathy in either upper extremity, and thus service connection for bilateral upper extremity radiculopathy cannot be granted.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation, and thus denied his claim for TDIU.