The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for paranoid schizophrenia due to new and material evidence. However, the claim for PTSD remains denied as there is no verified in-service stressor event and no current diagnosis of PTSD.
The deciding factor: There was no combat involvement during military service, and the veteran did not provide a verifiable in-service stressor event or current diagnosis of PTSD.
- Claimed conditions
- paranoid schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorder
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 27, 2006
- Citation
- 0633372
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,435 · Granted: 22% (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 0633372.
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.
- Denied
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for irritable bowel syndrome, sleep apnea, post-traumatic stress disorder, and urinary frequency as there is no competent evidence linking these conditions to his military service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of non-VA medical services provided on September 2, 2020 was denied under 38 U.S.C. § 1725 and 38 U.S.C. § 1728 due to lack of evidence in the file. The Board finds that remand is warranted for correction of errors in notice.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal has been dismissed as the appellant, through his representative, withdrew the appeal prior to a decision being made.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the AOJ's decision denying eligibility for the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is not supported by adequate reasoning and must be remanded to allow for a thorough review, including obtaining medical opinions on whether it is in the best interest of the Veteran to participate in the PCAFC program.
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.