The Board denied the veteran's claim for an aid and attendance allowance for his wife, finding that she did not meet the criteria for such benefits.
The deciding factor: The evidence did not show that the veteran's wife was blind or so nearly blind as to have corrected visual acuity of 5/200 or less in both eyes, or a patient in a nursing home due to mental or physical incapacity. She also did not establish a factual need for aid and attendance.
- Claimed conditions
- not specified in the decision
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- April 4, 2006
- Citation
- 0609719
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,013 · Granted: 17% (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 0609719.
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 Board denied both the claims for an earlier effective date and increased evaluation for DIC benefits, finding that there were no additional circumstances warranting such increases.
- Whole decision: Denied
The claims for concurrent receipt of VA disability compensation and military retirement pay from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2014, and proper payment pursuant to CRDP from January 1, 2005 to March 31, 2005 as the result of SMC have been denied. The Regional Office has already addressed these issues.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied entitlement to special monthly compensation (SMC) based on the need of the Veteran's spouse for regular aid and attendance, finding that there is no evidence showing she meets the requirements for aid and attendance.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's spouse is not entitled to a higher rate of DIC benefits as she and the Veteran were not married for at least eight years, and there are no other factors that would allow for an increase in her benefits.
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.