The Board dismissed the veteran's claim of service connection for porphyria cutanea tarda as he did not file a timely Substantive Appeal.,PTSD was also not perfected on appeal, and the Board dismissed this issue due to lack of timely filing of a Substantive Appeal.
The deciding factor: The veteran failed to perfect an appeal within the required timeframes for all issues related to service connection and temporary total disability evaluations.,No new evidence or arguments were provided by the veteran in response to the Board's request for such information, indicating that he did not have good cause to support his appeals.
- Claimed conditions
- porphyria cutanea tarda, post-traumatic stress disorder
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- January 7, 2003
- Citation
- 0300251
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,242 · Granted: 26% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0300251.
What this means for you
A dismissal means the Board did not decide the issue on its merits — usually because it was withdrawn or had become moot. It says more about procedure than about whether a claim like this can win.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for irritable bowel syndrome, sleep apnea, post-traumatic stress disorder, and urinary frequency as there is no competent evidence linking these conditions to his military service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of non-VA medical services provided on September 2, 2020 was denied under 38 U.S.C. § 1725 and 38 U.S.C. § 1728 due to lack of evidence in the file. The Board finds that remand is warranted for correction of errors in notice.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the AOJ's decision denying eligibility for the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is not supported by adequate reasoning and must be remanded to allow for a thorough review, including obtaining medical opinions on whether it is in the best interest of the Veteran to participate in the PCAFC program.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's claims for service connection and special monthly compensation based on housebound criteria were granted, effective September 22, 2009.
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.