The Board denied the appellant's request for an earlier effective date of July 19, 2012 for a 30 percent increased rating for service-connected diverticulosis. The decision found that there was no evidence of an increase in disability within one year prior to her claim and thus did not meet the criteria for an earlier effective date.
The deciding factor: The Board determined that there was no factual basis to grant an earlier effective date as the appellant's lay statements were inconsistent with her medical records, which indicated she had not experienced significant symptoms of diverticulosis within a year prior to filing her claim for increased rating.
- Claimed conditions
- diverticulosis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- May 29, 2019
- Citation
- 19141215
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,810 · Granted: 23% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed 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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 19141215.
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 case due to a duty to assist error, and will need to obtain an addendum medical opinion regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's diverticulosis and colon tumor.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's service connection claims for various conditions, including adjustment disorder, benign skin lesions, actinic keratosis, poikiloderma, porokeratosis, Parkinson's disease, benign prostatic hypertrophy, hypertension, increased urinary frequency, diverticulosis, duodenal ulcer, and bilateral cataracts are all granted due to exposure to herbicide agents, mustard gas, and ionizing radiation during service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded several issues related to the Veteran's service connection claims due to errors in the initial decision, including inadequate medical opinions and failure to consider all theories of entitlement.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that there was a duty to assist error and remands the case for further development. The Veteran seeks service connection for diverticulosis, which is currently denied.
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.