The Board found that the veteran did not suffer aggravation of PVD of the right leg as a result of surgery and treatment at a VA medical facility in February and March 1995, and therefore denied his claim for compensation benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.
The deciding factor: The Board determined that there was no evidence to support the veteran's claim that the surgery performed in 1995 aggravated his pre-existing PVD of the right leg.
- Claimed conditions
- Peripheral Vascular Disease (PVD) of the right leg
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 30, 2004
- Citation
- 0417464
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 999 · Granted: 31% (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 0417464.
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 remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining service records and VA treatment records from the 1960s, as well as scheduling a VA examination to determine the nature of the Veteran's current bilateral knee and leg disabilities and their relationship to his service.
- Granted
The Veteran developed additional disability resulting from VA treatment for PVD of the right leg in April 2006, culminating in amputation. The Board finds that this was not an ordinary risk of treatment and grants compensation benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
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.