The Veteran's death was not service-connected, and he did not meet the criteria for DIC under section 1318 as his total disability rating was not sustained for at least ten years prior to his death.
The deciding factor: The Veteran had a combined schedular rating of 70% or less before May 25, 2004 and did not have a combined schedular rating of 100% for any period of time immediately preceding his death in May 2006.
- Claimed conditions
- right shoulder gunshot wound, left shoulder gunshot wound, left upper arm gunshot wound, right upper thigh gunshot wound, right foot gunshot wound, varicose veins of the left lower extremity, varicose veins of the right lower extremity, right neck scar, right shoulder scar, left arm scar
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- August 5, 2009
- Citation
- 0929171
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 0929171.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
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).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claim for service connection of varicose veins of the right lower extremity due to a duty-to-assist error in pre-decisional duty-to-assist. The case will be returned to the AOJ for further review.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities have prevented him from securing and maintaining substantially gainful employment since June 30, 2018. The Board has granted a TDIU effective July 1, 2018.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has identified several duty-to-assist errors and is remanding the claims for service connection due to incomplete medical records, lack of proper notification, and inadequate examinations.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's prescribed topical skin medication, triamcinolone cream, caused irreparable damage to his clothing and the Board granted a clothing allowance for 2020 based on this.
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.