The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant did not file a timely Notice of Disagreement (NOD) with respect to the March 2003 decision denying eligibility for VA benefits.
The deciding factor: The appellant failed to submit a timely NOD within one year from the date of notification of the March 2003 rating decision, as required by law.
- Claimed conditions
- peptic ulcer, gunshot wound of the left thigh
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- July 7, 2006
- Citation
- 0619811
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,547 · Granted: 20% (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 0619811.
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A dismissal means the Board did not decide the issue on its merits — usually because it was withdrawn or had become moot.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
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Partly granted
The Veteran's appeal includes claims for service connection for a peptic ulcer and an initial rating for his right shoulder disability. The Board has remanded the issues of service connection for the peptic ulcer and the right shoulder disability, while denying an increased rating for the right shoulder disability and remanding the issue of effective date for TDIU prior to January 4, 2014.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to new evidence received since the November 2023 SSOC, and for an addendum VA opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's gastrointestinal disorder.
- Partly granted
The Board granted service connection for hypertension and erectile dysfunction, both presumed to be due to herbicide exposure. The claims for hypertrophy of the prostate, migraine headaches, and peptic ulcer were remanded.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the matter for an adequate VA examination and to obtain missing treatment 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.
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.