The veteran's claim for an evaluation in excess of 40 percent for ankylosing spondylitis of the lumbar segment of the spine prior to August 8, 2005 was denied.,The veteran's claim for increased evaluations for residuals of a right acromioclavicular separation from September 1, 1993, to September 10, 2001 and after September 10, 2001 and prior to August 8, 2005 was denied.,The veteran's claim for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for hypertension on appeal from initial grant of service connection was denied.,The veteran's claim for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for hepatitis (including a hiatal hernia and gastroesophageal reflux with history of a gallstone) on appeal from initial grant of service connection was denied.
The deciding factor: The evidence did not meet the criteria for a rating in excess of 40 percent for ankylosing spondylitis of the lumbar segment of the spine prior to August 8, 2005.,The evidence did not meet the criteria for increased evaluations for residuals of a right acromioclavicular separation from September 1, 1993, to September 10, 2001 and after September 10, 2001 and prior to August 8, 2005.,The evidence did not meet the criteria for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for hypertension on appeal from initial grant of service connection.,The evidence did not meet the criteria for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for hepatitis (including a hiatal hernia and gastroesophageal reflux with history of a gallstone) on appeal from initial grant of service connection.
- Claimed conditions
- ankylosing spondylitis of the lumbar segment of the spine, ankylosing spondylitis of the cervical segment of the spine (prior to September 1, 2001), ankylosing spondylitis of the cervical segment of the spine (after September 10, 2001), left knee disability, hypertension, residuals of hepatitis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 22, 2007
- Citation
- 0718925
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 0718925.
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 Veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development, including a new VA examination to assess his bilateral knee and hip disabilities.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for hypertension and peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper and lower extremities due to insufficient medical opinions regarding their etiology.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including VA examinations.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for additional development due to conflicting opinions regarding service connection for peripheral neuropathy, hypertension, and skin disabilities related to herbicide exposure.
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.