The Veteran's claim for service connection for coronary artery disease was denied as the preponderance of evidence did not support a finding that his condition began during active service or was related to an in-service injury.,The appellant's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for additional disability manifested by hypothyroidism was denied because the VA examiner found no indication that the Veteran's use of amiodarone caused his condition.,The appellant's claims for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for additional disability due to failure to remove a surgical clip in the left lower ankle and staple in the lower left leg were denied as the VA examiner found no evidence that the Veteran experienced an event not reasonably foreseeable or fault on the part of VA.
The deciding factor: The preponderance of the evidence did not support a finding that the Veteran's coronary artery disease began during active service or was related to an in-service injury.,The use of amiodarone, prescribed after the Veteran's February 2005 surgery, is considered standard of care and not out of the ordinary. The VA examiner opined that the Veteran's hypothyroidism was less likely due to fault on the part of VA.,There was no indication of a failure to exercise proper skill or judgment by VA in removing the surgical clip and staple from the Veteran's left lower leg/ankle, as residual pain is more likely associated with degenerative changes rather than carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault.
- Claimed conditions
- coronary artery disease, hypothyroidism, left ankle/leg condition
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 27, 2021
- Citation
- 21065826
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 21065826.
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.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for coronary artery disease is being remanded due to the inadequacy of a previous VA examination.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for coronary artery disease, hypertension, and stroke as there was no evidence of herbicide agent exposure during service and the medical opinions were against a nexus to service.
- Granted
The Veteran's service connection claim for coronary artery disease with myocardial infarction is granted on a presumptive basis due to exposure to herbicide agents during his active duty in Korea.
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.