The veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of a cold injury to the hands and feet is denied as there are no current medical findings or diagnoses indicating such residuals exist.
The deciding factor: There is no competent medical evidence showing current residuals of a cold injury, despite the veteran's assertions. The Board finds that Hickson element (1) has not been met.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals of cold injury of hands and feet
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 27, 2003
- Citation
- 0305813
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,555 · Granted: 19% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted 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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0305813.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has ordered a remand due to the need for an examination to determine if the veteran's exposure to cold resulted in any permanent secondary debilitating effects on his hands and feet, including arthritis of the knees. The claim will be reconsidered after this development.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of cold injury, rheumatoid and/or osteoarthritis, and peripheral neuropathy and vascular disease. The evidence did not establish a link between these conditions and his military service.
- Granted
The Board of Veterans' Appeals has granted service connection for PTSD and Mood Disorders, both presumed conditions under the PACT Act.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
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.