16-40 141

CourtBoard of Veterans' Appeals
DecidedSeptember 18, 2019
Docket16-40 141
StatusUnpublished

This text of 16-40 141 (16-40 141) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Board of Veterans' Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
16-40 141, (bva 2019).

Opinion

Citation Nr: 19172652 Decision Date: 09/18/19 Archive Date: 09/18/19

DOCKET NO. 16-40 141 DATE: September 18, 2019

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for a left eye disability is dismissed.

Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disability, claimed as shortness of breath, is dismissed.

Entitlement to service connection for a gastrointestinal disability is denied.

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for headaches, to include as secondary to service-connected posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), is remanded.

Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 30 for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded.

Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 0 for a left index finger scar is remanded.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. In a May 18, 2019 written statement, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran’s representative that a withdrawal of the appeal for entitlement to a service connection for a left eye disability and respiratory disability was requested.

2. The preponderance of the evidence is against a finding that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of any gastrointestinal disability.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal for entitlement to entitlement to a service connection for a left eye disability and respiratory disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204.

2. The criteria for service connection for a gastrointestinal disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.159, 3.303.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served on active duty from January 1968 to January 1970. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from January 2013 and May 2015 rating decisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida.

The Board may dismiss any appeal which does not allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or the authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204.

In May 2019 correspondence, the Veteran withdrew the claims for entitlement to service connection for an eye disability and respiratory disability. Thus, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal concerning entitlement to service connection for an eye disability and respiratory disability and those claims are dismissed.

Service Connection

In general, service connection may be established for disability or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection may also be established for disability shown after service, when all of the evidence, including that pertinent to service, shows that it was incurred or aggravated in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d).

To establish a service connection for a disability, a Veteran must show: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163(Fed. Cir. 2004).

A disability may be service connected if the evidence of record shows that the Veteran currently has a disability that was chronic in service or that was chronic as defined by regulation with continuity of symptomatology demonstrated after service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a),(b); Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

A Veteran need only demonstrate that there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence in order to prevail. To deny a claim on its merits, the preponderance of the evidence must be against the claim. Alemany v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 518 (1996); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990).

1. Entitlement to service connection for a gastrointestinal disability

The Veteran contends that he had bad stomach pains and acid reflux in service. He stated that he has continuously gad bad heartburn and acid reflux when stressed out since separation.

The service medical records do not show complaints of a gastrointestinal disability or stomach problems. The post-service medical records do not show the Veteran had nausea or heartburn. The medical evidence of record does not show any gastrointestinal disability has been diagnosed. The Veteran has not notified VA of any medical evidence which supports a finding that any gastrointestinal disability has been diagnosed.

The Board finds that service connection for a gastrointestinal disability is not warranted. Without a diagnosis of a current disability, service connection cannot be established for a gastrointestinal disability. Congress has specifically limited entitlement to service-connected benefits to cases where there is a current disability. In the absence of proof of a present disability, there can be no valid claim. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223 (1992). The evidence does not show during or contemporary to the period of the claim that the Veteran had a gastrointestinal disability or stomach problems that resulted in functional loss that could be considered a disability.

The presence of a chronic disability at any time during the claim process can justify a grant of service connection, even where the most recent diagnosis is negative. McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319 (2007). Because there was no actual disability diagnosed at any time since the claim was filed or contemporary to the filing of the claim, and there remains no current evidence of the claimed disability, no valid claim for service connection for a disability related to a gastrointestinal disability exists. The Veteran has not submitted any contrary competent medical evidence suggesting that that he has any current gastrointestinal disability, or that any current gastrointestinal disability is related to service.

As the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim for service connection for a gastrointestinal disability, the claim must be denied. 38 U.S.C.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Davidson v. SHINSEKI
581 F.3d 1313 (Federal Circuit, 2009)
Ray A. Mc Clain v. R. James Nicholson
21 Vet. App. 319 (Veterans Claims, 2007)
Walker v. Shinseki
708 F.3d 1331 (Federal Circuit, 2013)
Gilbert v. Derwinski
1 Vet. App. 49 (Veterans Claims, 1990)
Schafrath v. Derwinski
1 Vet. App. 589 (Veterans Claims, 1991)
Brammer v. Derwinski
3 Vet. App. 223 (Veterans Claims, 1992)
Robinette v. Brown
8 Vet. App. 69 (Veterans Claims, 1995)
Alemany v. Brown
9 Vet. App. 518 (Veterans Claims, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
16-40 141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/16-40-141-bva-2019.