The Board found that new and material evidence had not been presented to reopen the appellant's claim for service connection for cardiovascular disease. The RO denied the claim in March 1994, but the veteran sought to reopen it in May 1997. In February 1998, the RO determined that no new evidence was submitted sufficient to change the outcome of the denial.
The deciding factor: The newly presented evidence did not establish a link between the appellant's currently claimed heart disease and his period of service.
- Claimed conditions
- cardiovascular disease
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 11, 2002
- Citation
- 0201373
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0201373.
What this means for you
A partial grant means some issues were granted while others were denied or remanded — common in multi-issue claims. Look at which issues went which way, and how each was argued.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to a procedural defect in compliance with claims-processing rules. The VA Form 10182 submitted by the Veteran attempted a concurrent election, which is prohibited.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to a duty-to-assist error regarding the Veteran's exposure to asbestos and Agent Orange during service. The claims are now pending for further development.
- Granted
The Veteran's claim for an effective date prior to June 12, 2018, for the grant of service connection for transient global amnesia (also claimed as memory loss) was denied. The Board also denied service connection for cardiovascular disease.
- Denied
The Veteran's pending service connection claims for atrial fibrillation, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and essential tremors were not resolved before his death. The Board denied the appeal as the Appellant did not file a timely request to substitute in her husband's name.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.