The Board remanded the hearing loss evaluation issue for further development. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. ยง 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.
Service connection basically means that the facts, shown by evidence, establish that a particular injury or disease resulting in disability was incurred coincident with service in the Armed Forces, or if preexisting such service, was aggravated therein.
The RO also issued a rating action in August 2010 that denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral lower extremity neuropathy and for hypertension. See Mayfield v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. and (3) a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability.
See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. Rather, the Board relies on credible and supported evidence showing that the Veteran made several deliberate and intentional acts of wrongdoing with wanton and reckless disregard of probable consequences, and that that wrongdoing caused the accident and his death.
Legal entitlement to VA compensation benefits, to include service connection for residuals of aggravation of chronic ear infections, hearing loss, and right ear tympanoplasty with partial ossicular replacement prosthesis.Thus, the Board finds that VA has fully satisfied the duty to assist.
The Veteran's claim for TDIU was denied in the May 2002 rating decision. See Gonzales v. West, 218 F.3d 1378, 1380-81 (Fed. As such, there is no evidence to suggest an injury superimposed on the Veteran's preexisting spina bifida occulta and service connection is not possible for this disability.
In November 2010, VA provided the Veteran with a general medical examination.The Board's review of the claims file-including the available service treatment records; and the November 2010 and August 2013 VA examination reports-does not yield any indication of right knee problems prior to service.
Whether the Veteran's May 2012 substantive appeal to the January 2011 rating decision was timely filed, and if not may such untimely filing be waived.The RO forwarded a Statement of the Case to the Veteran by letter dated February 23, 2012. Bailey, 160 F.3d at 1365; See Cintron v. West, 13 Vet.
See Mayfield, 444 F.3d 1328; To prevail on a claim of direct service connection, there must be competent and credible evidence of (1) a current disability, (2) in-service occurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury;To date, the Veteran has been diagnosed with depression only.
Citation Nr: 1339312 Decision Date: 11/29/13 Archive Date: 12/13/13 DOCKET NO. 13-17 008 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Muskogee
See Justus v. Principi, 3 Vet.The evidence of record in June 2005 consisted of the Veteran's statements, service treatment records (STRs), VA outpatient records, 1998 and 2002 private audiological records, and VA examination reports dated in August 2002, February 2004 and April 2005.
Since the October 2010 effective date of the award of service connection, the Veteran's service-connected right knee disability has been manifested by extension to 0 degrees and flexion to 140 degrees, with no objective evidence of pain on motion; Otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned.
and (5) the effective date of the disability.VA also fulfilled its duty to assist.Given the evidence of record, the Board finds that service connection for residuals of an ankle fracture is not warranted because the Veteran's ankle disability was not aggravated in service.
Entitlement to service connection for a herniated disc. and (3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability.The Veteran alleges indicates that he injured his back while lifting heavy materials for a helicopter landing pad.
Entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a psychotic disorder, major depression, generalized anxiety disorder, agoraphobia with panic attacks, and stress related psychological response affecting a medical condition.
The Veteran had active service from April 1961 to November 1983. After her representative issue is clarified, inform the appellant of her Board hearing options and ask her to affirmatively state whether she want a hearing before the Board and what type of hearing. Then readjudicate the claim.
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.
See Dunn v. West, 11 Vet. Following completion of the above requested action, schedule the Veteran for a VA orthopedic examination in order to determine whether the Veteran's current neck disability is related to his military service, or his service-connected low back disability.
Upon remand, ongoing VA medical records should be obtained. (a) Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's right hallux valgus or any other right foot disability is proximately due to or the result of the service-connected knee disabilities.
The VA examiner based the opinion on the in-service examination reports, which showed the Veteran had hearing within normal limits in both ears when he entered active duty and two months before his discharge from active duty, with no significant change in hearing in either ear.
