The Board found that the Veteran's timely notice of disagreement was not received by either the RO or the Board within the statutory period, but granted equitable tolling and accepted his December 2008 VA Form 9 as a valid appeal. The claims for service connection were decided on their merits.
The deciding factor: The Veteran expressed confusion over the proper addressee for adjudicative responses and did not receive adequate support from his representative who received copies of all adjudication documents, warranting equitable tolling.
- Claimed conditions
- left knee disorder, groin pain, swollen or painful joints, throat disorder, chronic or frequent colds, dental disorder, depression, lumbar disc fusion with neuropathic left side pain, erectile dysfunction, eye or vision disorder, headaches, heart disorder
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- April 18, 2012
- Citation
- 1214139
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 1214139.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development, including obtaining SSA records and providing proper notice regarding secondary service connection.
- Granted
The Board has determined that the Veteran's headaches are at least as likely as not caused by his service-connected traumatic brain injury, and thus grants service connection for this condition.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete development of records and will provide a supplemental statement of the case if necessary.
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.