The veteran claims that he incurred a phrenic nerve injury during service and argues for an earlier effective date based on clear and unmistakable error (CUE) in the February 1994 rating decision. The Board found no evidence of such an injury prior to May 8, 1992.
The deciding factor: The veteran's phrenic nerve injury was first identified in a May 1992 VA chest x-ray examination and confirmed by a July 1993 VA examination report. There is no evidence showing the injury occurred before this date.
- Claimed conditions
- phrenic nerve injury
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- October 29, 2003
- Citation
- 0329492
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 0329492.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
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 claims for service connection for paralyzed diaphragm, right side and phrenic nerve injury are denied as new and relevant evidence has not been received. The claim for service connection for thoracic outlet syndrome, right shoulder is remanded due to a duty to assist error. The claim for service connection for erectile dysfunction is also remanded due to the PACT Act requiring a TERA-specific VA medical opinion.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining an addendum medical opinion to determine if VA's heart surgery in March 2014 caused additional disability resulting from phrenic nerve injury and whether such disability was due to negligence or lack of informed consent.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient examination and incomplete medical records. The Veteran's respiratory disorder, including COPD, needs further evaluation by a VA examiner.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining an addendum opinion from a VA cardiac surgeon and securing relevant medical records.
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. How we handle your email.
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.