Tinnitus (ringing in the ears) Board decisions

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's current hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his military service.

The Board found that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus did not begin during or were otherwise caused by his military service, including any noise exposure.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claim for service connection for tinnitus is pending, but its disposition remains unknown.,Service connection for left hip pain was denied as there is no competent evidence linking current symptoms to military service. The claim is currently reopened and can be reconsidered on the merits if new and material evidence is received.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's tinnitus was incurred during active service and is granted as a direct connection, resolving all doubt in favor of the Veteran.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's conditions are due to noise exposure during his military service.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus and remanded the remaining claims due to incomplete records.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are likely related to his noise exposure during service, and thus grants service connection for both conditions.

The Board found that the Veteran's current hearing loss and tinnitus are not related to his military service, as there is no evidence of in-service noise exposure or any significant shift in hearing thresholds during active duty. The medical opinions provided by VA examiners did not support a link between the disabilities and service.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain additional medical records and to schedule him for a VA examination. The issues of service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability and tinnitus are pending.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain additional medical records and to schedule him for VA examinations to determine the nature and etiology of his claimed disabilities.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's tinnitus is related to his military service, and thus grants service connection for tinnitus.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current bilateral sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his military service, including exposure to noise trauma. As a result, the claims for service connection have been granted.

The Board has determined that a remand is necessary to obtain additional medical evidence and for further development before the claim can be adjudicated.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine the etiology of the Veteran's claimed bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, including whether these conditions are related to in-service noise exposure.

The Veteran's tinnitus was granted service connection. The initial evaluations for his cervical spine and lumbar spine disabilities were also granted, with the effective date being September 26, 2003.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation, warranting TDIU benefits.

The Board has remanded the case for a Travel Board hearing before a Veterans Law Judge at the RO due to the VLJ who conducted the February 2011 hearing no longer being employed.

The Veteran's death was not caused by or substantially contributed to by a service-connected disability. Service connection for PTSD was denied as there is no evidence of the condition during his lifetime.

The Veteran's vertigo, tinnitus, and pharyngeal polyps were not found to be related to service. The hearing loss disability was also not found to be related to service.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and TDIU were denied as there is no legal basis for the assignment of a schedular evaluation in excess of 10 percent for tinnitus. The Veteran was provided adequate VCAA notice, but additional development is required prior to appellate review.