The Board found that the appellant's appeal was untimely and denied it, as her substantive appeal was not received within one year of the October 2014 rating decision or more than 60 days after the March 17, 2017 SOC.
The deciding factor: The appellant did not file a timely substantive appeal following the issuance of the SOC addressing the issues of whether new and material evidence had been received in order to reopen previously denied claims of entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus type II, a heart disorder, and gout, and the issue of entitlement to service connection for renal failure.
- Claimed conditions
- diabetes mellitus type II, heart disorder, gout, renal failure
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 1, 2023
- Citation
- 23012472
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 23012472.
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 claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's gout claim for additional development, including obtaining an adequate VA examination and ensuring all relevant records are obtained. The TDIU claim is also being remanded.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has found that the Veteran meets the basic medical eligibility criteria for PCAFC benefits due to his need for personal care services based on symptoms or residuals of neurological or other impairment or injury. However, further clinical evaluation is needed to determine if participation in the program is in the Veteran's best interest.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection due to errors in obtaining relevant medical records and authorization for private treatment providers. The issues include heart disorder, OSA, sinusitis, lumbar spine disorder, and right knee disorder all related to Agent Orange exposure.
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.