The Veteran's appeal involves two separate periods of evaluation for his mitral valve replacement residuals. The first issue is whether he should receive a higher disability rating prior to December 11, 2006, and the second is whether he should receive a higher disability rating from December 11, 2006, to August 20, 2009.
The deciding factor: The decision was remanded multiple times for additional action, including obtaining private clinical documentation. The final evaluation increased his disability rating from 60 percent to 100 percent effective August 21, 2009.
- Claimed conditions
- mitral valve replacement residuals
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 2, 2010
- Citation
- 1020297
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 1020297.
What this means for you
A partial grant means some issues were granted while others were denied or remanded — common in multi-issue claims. Look at which issues went which way, and how each was argued.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Veteran's mitral valve replacement residuals were shown to be manifested by an estimated workload of more than 3 up to 5 METs, without evidence of chronic congestive heart failure or left ventricular dysfunction with an ejection fraction of less than 30 percent. The criteria for a higher evaluation are not met.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the issues of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for the veteran's mitral valve replacement residuals for the period prior to December 11, 2006, and an evaluation in excess of 60 percent for his mitral valve replacement residuals for the period on and after December 11, 2006, for additional development.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
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.