The Veteran's claim for residuals of malaria was denied as there is no evidence of current disability related to service.,Service connection for sinusitis was denied due to lack of a link between the condition and service, with the most probative evidence indicating it is not related to service.,The fungal condition of the bilateral feet was denied because there is no evidence linking it to service.,Bilateral hearing loss was denied as the Veteran did not notice any hearing impairment until after service, and the VA examiner found a less likely than not relationship between current hearing loss and in-service noise exposure.
The deciding factor: The residuals of malaria claim lacks evidence of current disability related to service. The Veteran's service treatment records do not indicate a diagnosis of malaria.,Service connection for sinusitis was denied because the VA examiner found no link between the condition and service, with the most probative evidence indicating it is due to seasonal rhinitis unrelated to service.,The fungal condition of the bilateral feet claim lacks evidence linking it to service. The Veteran's treatment records do not indicate any etiological relationship to service.,Bilateral hearing loss was denied as there is no evidence of noise exposure during service, and the VA examiner found a less likely than not relationship between current hearing loss and in-service noise exposure.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals of malaria, sinusitis, fungal condition of the bilateral feet, bilateral hearing loss
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 14, 2019
- Citation
- 19185735
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,092 · Granted: 42% (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 19185735.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal for service connection of bilateral hearing loss and a ruptured right ear drum was dismissed due to the death of the Veteran.
- Denied
The Board found that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss was noted upon entry into active duty service and did not increase in severity during service. Therefore, it denied his claim for service connection.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for bilateral hearing loss, migraine headaches, and PTSD due to additional development of records and examination.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss claim, specifically needing an addendum opinion from a VA examiner. The Veteran will be asked to provide any missing records and former employers' information.
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.