The veteran's claim for increased evaluation of tinnitus was denied as there is no legal basis to assign a schedular evaluation in excess of the maximum rating authorized.,Evidence submitted since the April 2002 denial did not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claims for Hepatitis C and Hypertension, but did raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim for PTSD.,The veteran's claim for service connection for Arthritis of the right knee was denied as evidence submitted since the April 2002 denial does not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim.,Evidence submitted since the December 2002 Board decision related to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim and raised a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim for PTSD.
The deciding factor: The veteran's service-connected tinnitus is assigned the maximum schedular rating available.,Evidence submitted since the April 2002 denial does not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claims for Hepatitis C and Hypertension, but raises a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim for PTSD.,The evidence submitted since the April 2002 denial does not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim for Arthritis of the right knee.,Evidence submitted since the December 2002 Board decision relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim and raises a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim for PTSD.
- Claimed conditions
- Hepatitis C, Hypertension, Arthritis of the right knee, Pseudofolliculitis (skin condition of the face), Erectile dysfunction, Post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 29, 2007
- Citation
- 0737442
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 0737442.
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 denied the claim of service connection for hypertension, finding that it did not manifest during service and is not causally related to the Veteran's exposure to herbicides or service.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for hypertension, finding that there was no evidence of a nexus between his current condition and active duty service or herbicide exposure.
- Denied
The Board has denied service connection for hypertension and has remanded the issue of an increased rating for skin condition.
- Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for residuals of prostate cancer due to VA's failure to notify him of his April 17, 2008, elevated PSA test results and its failure to timely diagnose and properly treat his disease.
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.