The Veteran's service-connected spasmodic dysphonia did not manifest with thickening or nodules of cords, polyps, submucous infiltration or pre-malignant changes. Therefore, the claim for a rating in excess of 10 percent was denied.
The deciding factor: The evidence did not demonstrate hoarseness with thinning or nodules of cords, polyps, submucous infiltration, or pre-malignant changes on biopsy; or an inability to speak above a whisper.
- Claimed conditions
- Spasmodic dysphonia
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- February 25, 2020
- Citation
- 20014331
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 20014331.
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 Veteran's claim for an initial compensable rating for spasmodic dysphonia is remanded due to a pre-decisional duty-to-assist error in the AOJ's failure to provide the correct VA examination necessary to properly apply the correct diagnostic code for his service-connected disability.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for an increased rating of 30 percent for spasmodic dysphonia is granted. The issue of TDIU has been remanded due to lack of clarity in the employment and education history.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to new evidence submitted by the Veteran and a need for a contemporaneous VA examination.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate opinions and a need for further examination regarding the Veteran's claim of service connection for spasmodic dysphonia.
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.