The Board found no clear and unmistakable error in the 1976 decision denying service connection for organic heart disease, as the correct facts were known at the time and there was no evidence of aggravation during service.
The deciding factor: The Board concluded that even if it had not specifically referenced a notation on the claim form regarding visits to sick call in service, this error would not have manifestly changed the outcome because the probative evidence did not show any evidence of in-service aggravation of a pre-existing heart condition.
- Claimed conditions
- organic heart disease, atrial septal defect
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 4, 2009
- Citation
- 0907948
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 251 · Granted: 25% (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 0907948.
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A dismissal means the Board did not decide the issue on its merits — usually because it was withdrawn or had become moot.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.
- Granted
The Veteran's heart condition was rated at 100% but reduced to 60%. The reduction was overturned, and the original rating of 100% is restored. SMC based on housebound criteria is also restored.
- Granted
The Board granted an effective date of January 25, 2019, for the award of service connection for atrial septal defect.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for both atrial septal defect and bilateral deuteranopia, finding that these conditions are congenital defects not aggravated by military service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate examination and duty-to-assist error, as well as the need for a TERA opinion. The Veteran's atrial septal defect is presumed to be related to herbicide exposure in Vietnam.
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.