The Board denied the veteran's claims for earlier effective dates and increased ratings, as well as higher levels of special monthly compensation.
The deciding factor: The evidence did not establish a basis for an earlier effective date or a compensable rating for erectile dysfunction, nor was there sufficient evidence to warrant a higher level of SMC based on loss of use of a creative organ.
- Claimed conditions
- tinnitus, bilateral plantar fasciitis, neck disorder, skin disorder, claimed as psoriasis, nerve-related disorder of the trunk or upper-extremities, claimed as nerve-related soft-tissue sarcoma, extremities or trunk, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- December 29, 2025
- Citation
- A25110520
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 998 · Granted: 40% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed 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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation A25110520.
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 Board has remanded the claims for service connection for hearing loss, tinnitus, and an acquired psychiatric disorder due to incomplete medical records and need for further examination.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for tinnitus, arthritis, and memory loss. The decision found no evidence linking these conditions to his military service.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's tinnitus is granted as service connected. The issues of foot disability and cardiovascular disorder are remanded for additional development.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus, finding that it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran experienced tinnitus during his active duty service.
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.