Scars decisions — 2014

The Veteran's scar is not deep, does not cause limitation of motion, and does not cover an area exceeding 12 square inches. Therefore, the criteria for a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected scar have not been met.

The Board has remanded the case due to a request for a Travel Board hearing. The Veteran's claims for service connection and initial ratings remain pending.

The Veteran's right knee disability was rated at 30% effective July 13, 2012. The Board denied a higher rating based on the severity of symptoms and impairment during this period.

The Veteran's TDIU claim is being remanded for additional examinations to assess the functional impairment caused by his service-connected disabilities and for further development.

The Board finds that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities did not contribute to his death, and thus does not grant service connection for the cause of his death.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for a left forearm muscle injury with ulnar nerve neuropathy and left forearm scarring are being remanded to the RO for additional development of his VA treatment records.

The Veteran's claims for service connection and increased ratings were denied. The Board found no evidence of GERD, and the lumbar spine and right knee disabilities do not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Board has granted service connection for right ear hearing loss disability. The issue of entitlement to an initial compensable disability rating for right testicle scar, residual of right hydrocele removal and orchiopexy is remanded.

The Veteran's appeal for initial compensable ratings for bilateral hearing loss and left shoulder disabilities was dismissed due to the Veteran withdrawing from appeal his claim for an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for facial scars, head injuries/headaches, and bilateral knee disabilities due to a lack of new and material evidence.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an effective date prior to March 16, 2009 for a 50 percent rating for her service-connected chronic pelvic/abdominal pain with nerve impingement, surgical scars, and scar tissue.

The Board found that the Veteran's vision problems, facial scar, and right ankle fracture residuals were not caused by VA medical care. The Board concluded that there was no additional disability or death resulting from VA treatment.

The Veteran's claim for vocational rehabilitation benefits was denied because he is already employed in a suitable position and does not have an employment handicap due to his service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection were denied. The epididymitis claim was granted with a noncompensable rating, while the urethritis, lumbar spine disability, bilateral knee disability, scars or marks on buttocks and coccyx, shortening of left lower extremity, and residuals of stomach injury claims were all denied.

The Veteran's claims for service connection were denied across multiple conditions, including prostatitis, memory loss, refractive errors of the eye, wrist condition, sinus bradycardia, hypercholesterolemia, ischemic heart disease, PTSD, sleep apnea, left elbow scar, pseudofolliculitis barbae, right hand middle finger acquired deformity, bilateral peripheral retinal degeneration with dysfunctional tear syndrome and vitreous floaters, hypertension, and erectile dysfunction. The claims were denied as there was no competent evidence of a service connection for these conditions.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and SSA records. The case will be adjudicated again after the new evidence is considered.

The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn, and his claims for increased ratings have not been decided by the Board.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to procedural defects, including the failure to issue a statement of the case for his disagreement with assigned evaluations and earlier effective dates. The TDIU claim will be adjudicated in conjunction with these issues.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including obtaining medical records and considering the September 2014 VA examination results. The case will be reconsidered with these new developments.