The Board has determined that the appellant did not file a timely Notice of Disagreement (NOD) regarding the March 11, 2005 and April 7, 2005 decisions denying reimbursement for unauthorized medical expenses. As such, the appeal is dismissed.
The deciding factor: The appellant failed to file a timely NOD within one year from the date of the denial letters, as required by VA regulations.
- Claimed conditions
- Not specified in this decision
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- October 2, 2008
- Citation
- 0833920
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 0833920.
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A dismissal means the Board did not decide the issue on its merits — usually because it was withdrawn or had become moot.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
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).
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.