The claims for service connection for peripheral neuropathy in the left and right upper extremities were dismissed as moot, while the claim for an earlier effective date for coronary artery disease was remanded.
The deciding factor: The issues of bilateral upper extremity radiculopathy have been fully granted, making further relief impossible; the RO failed to properly adjudicate a timely notice of disagreement regarding CAD, necessitating a remand for additional evidence and clarification on the onset of CAD.
- Claimed conditions
- Coronary artery disease (CAD), Peripheral neuropathy, left upper extremity, Peripheral neuropathy, right upper extremity
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 5, 2025
- Citation
- A25049781
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 734 · Granted: 31% (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 A25049781.
What this means for you
A dismissal means the Board did not decide the issue on its merits — usually because it was withdrawn or had become moot. It says more about procedure than about whether a claim like this can win.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for peripheral neuropathy in both upper extremities and the TDIU claim prior to July 12, 2011. The Veteran's disabilities alone did not render him unemployable at that time.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's current coronary artery disease with acute, subacute, or old myocardial infarction with coronary stent is being remanded for further evaluation due to the lack of a medical nexus between his service-connected hypertension and his heart condition.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for SMC based on aid and attendance from June 1, 2011, to May 24, 2017, finding that his need for regular aid and attendance was not established during this period.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has found new and relevant evidence for the claims of service connection for coronary artery disease (CAD) and an acquired psychiatric disorder. The AOJ is required to readjudicate these claims, taking into consideration all submitted evidence.
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.