Veterans’ RightsAn independent resource for veterans
← All decisions
Partly granted

The Veteran's claim for service connection for hypertension was denied and not reopened, resulting in a denial of the appeal.,Service connection for vertigo has been granted as it is secondary to service-connected migraine headaches.,Obesity was found not to be a disease or injury for VA compensation purposes, thus denying the claim for obesity.,Encephalomalacia was denied due to lack of evidence showing current disability related to in-service head trauma.,The Veteran's erectile dysfunction claim remains denied as there is no evidence of a penile deformity.,Service connection for obstructive sleep apnea and gastrointestinal disorders are pending, requiring further examination and opinion.,Other issues remain unresolved.

The deciding factor: New and material evidence was not submitted to reopen the hypertension claim. The Veteran's wife provided information that was previously considered in July 2001 final denial of service connection for hypertension.,The Board resolved reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, finding current vertigo secondary to his service-connected migraine headaches.,Obesity is not a disease or injury for VA compensation purposes and thus cannot be granted service connection. The claim was denied as there was no evidence showing obesity manifested during service or related to a service-connected disability.,There is no evidence of encephalomalacia, the current disability must be shown by medical evidence, and without such evidence, the claim is denied.,The Veteran's erectile dysfunction does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating as there is no evidence of a penile deformity. The claim remains denied.,Service connection for obstructive sleep apnea and gastrointestinal disorders are pending due to insufficient evidence regarding their onset or relationship to service.,Other issues remain unresolved.

Claimed conditions
hypertension, obesity, vertigo, encephalomalacia, erectile dysfunction
How they argued it
Secondary to another service-connected condition
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
February 22, 2019
Citation
19113100

Veterans Law Judge

K. A. BANFIELD

Decisions by this judge: 1,738 · Granted: 17% (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 19113100.

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.

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.