The Board granted service connection for erectile dysfunction due to the Veteran's service-connected PTSD and denied entitlement to a TDIU rating and an effective date prior to October 21, 2020, for basic eligibility for Dependents' Educational Assistance.
The deciding factor: The evidence persuaded that the Veteran's erectile dysfunction is secondary to his service-connected PTSD, but there was no persuasive evidence that his service-connected disabilities prevented him from securing and following substantially gainful employment or that he met DEA eligibility prior to October 21, 2020.
- Claimed conditions
- Erectile dysfunction, Testicular conditions (to include spermatocele of the right testis and bilateral testicular microlithiasis)
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 4, 2025
- Citation
- A25095566
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 252 · Granted: 33% (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 A25095566.
What this means for you
A partial grant means some issues were granted while others were denied or remanded — common in multi-issue claims. Look at which issues went which way, and how each was argued.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for further development due to insufficient evidence and need for additional examinations.
- Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for residuals of prostate cancer due to VA's failure to notify him of his April 17, 2008, elevated PSA test results and its failure to timely diagnose and properly treat his disease.
- Granted
The Veteran's September 4, 2024 HLR request was improperly rejected by the AOJ. The Board finds that the request is timely and valid, and reinstates the claims for earlier effective dates and increased ratings.
- Denied
The Veteran's service-connected conditions do not meet the criteria for special monthly compensation based on the need of regular aid and attendance due to his psychiatric symptoms.
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.