The Veteran's bilateral knee pain is granted service connection, but his bilateral hearing loss and OSA are denied. The cervical strain and generalized anxiety disorder claims are remanded for further review.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner found the bilateral patellofemoral pain syndrome to be at least as likely as not related to the Veteran's service-connected lumbar spine disability, satisfying all elements of secondary service connection.
- Claimed conditions
- Bilateral knee pain, Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), Cervical strain, Generalized anxiety disorder, Hypoesthesia, paresthesia of left upper extremity
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 15, 2026
- Citation
- A26004275
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 A26004275.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), finding that both conditions are secondary to the Veteran's service-connected lower back condition and sinusitis, respectively.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for an initial disability rating in excess of 10 percent for cervical strain, service connection for left leg pain (claimed as joint pain), and service connection for a left ear hearing condition are being remanded due to duty-to-assist errors.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal of the issue of service connection for 9400 mental disorders, anxiety disorders, and generalized anxiety disorder was dismissed due to concurrent appeals. The claim is considered a supplemental claim for an already adjudicated issue.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for a higher level of SMC was denied as the Board found that he is already in receipt of SMC at the (l) rate based on need for regular aid and attendance due to service-connected disabilities, including coronary artery disease with congestive heart failure. A second award of SMC at the (l) rate based on need for regular aid and attendance was not warranted.
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.