Appeals

[myround0]

I opened my case in Feb '08. In Jan '09, I received a denial notice. I promptly followed that up with an NOD, in the same month. In Sept. '09 I was sent an SOC, in Oct. '09 I filled out the Form 9 and sent it in. In July '10 I was told my case was ready to send to the BVA. My question is; How much longer before this process is complete?

I welcome input from anyone here at Hadit...

Edited September 5, 2010 by myround0

[myround0]

Carlie, and any of the others distinguished informers,

Yes, I filed my claim Feb. '08

Reasons and bases for denial, and SOC almost word for word in verbiage. The Jan. '09 denial and the DRO SOC in Sept. '09, pretty much word for word. The spelling might be a little better from the DRO. But, pretty much a mirrored image.

Keeping in mind, what I claimed comes straight from my Service Medical Records (SMR).

I post this passage from 38 cfr because it supports two of my claims.

§ 4.22 Rating of disabilities aggravated by active service.

In cases involving aggravation by active service, the rating will reflect only the degree of disability over and above the degree existing at the time of entrance into the active service, whether the particular condition was noted at the time of entrance into the active service, or it is determined upon the evidence of record to have existed at that time. It is necessary therefore, in all cases of this character to deduct from the present degree of disability the degree, if ascertainable, of the disability existing at the time of entrance into active service, in terms of the rating schedule, except that if the disability is total (100 percent) no deduction will be made. The resulting difference will be recorded on the rating sheet. If the degree of disability at the time of entrance into the service is not ascertainable in terms of the schedule, no deduction will be made.

My first claim is Anemia.

Their reasons and bases for denial states; Service connection for anemia is denied since this condition neither occurred in nor was caused by service.

We all know working around Jet fuel and other hazardous chemical can have numerous effects on the human body. I was diagnosed in 1991, while in service. My 1991 physical exam shows now prior history. I made a package containing the report performed on my blood pattern. I placed all the information containing the issue in one outline, highlighted all the info, and stapled it all together. I also stated, that in the above passage, a condition not noted at the time of entry will be rated and no deduction will be made.

Flat feet

Their reason; the evidence shows that bilateral pes planus existed prior to service. There must be objective evidence of worsening of a pre-existing condition in order to establish service connection by aggravation. In 1984 during my entry exam the examiner listed mild asymptomatic pes planus. In 1991 during, while in service, during a physical exam, a different examiner, gave me a clean bill of health. In 2002, during physical therapy, the therapist noticed my flat feet and gave me some soft gel inserts. Again, inside the package I sent to the VA, I outlined, highlighted, and stapled all the info together. I also stated, according to the passage above. By the VA rating schedule Mild Pes planus is listed at 0 percent, that should be subtracted from the present condition of bilateral pes planus, which is 50%.

Allergic rhinitis

This is rated at 0% non compensable. Stating I need at least a 50% obstruction of nasal passage on both sides or complete obstruction on one side. I wrote a letter to the VA regional office stating, I mischaracterized my condition, when I first spoke with the examiner. Again, my smr, almost 20 years worth of information is well documented. I outlined, highlighted, and stapled it all together.

Low Sperm Count

Another condition rated at 0% non compensable. They sight a 1991 exam that stated bilateral varicoceles as the rational for my low count. One doctor out of ten made that claim nine others to include the examiner recommended by this doctor noted normal testis. Further two C&P and both examiners stated no varicoceles. Again, my SMR package contained an outline, highlighted, and stapled with this information, to include, several Personnel Health Assessments (PHA) that stated no varicoceles.

Just a little of what I am claiming. We will have to see how it plays out. I welcome any input. Thanks to you all...

Edited September 10, 2010 by myround0

[carlie]

myround,

Thanks for posting this.

Now we can get a few more eyes on it and help see if you can get

an attack plan going on what needs to be done.

[myround0]

Thanks, Carlie, all...

[myround0]

Can someone break down, or provide the meaning to the fragment "as likely than to not have"?

Edited September 15, 2010 by myround0

[pacmanx1]

Is cause by or a result of: 100% chance of being granted.

Is most likely cause by or result of: 75% chance of being granted.

Is as least likely as not (50/50 probability) caused by or a result of: 50% chance of being granted. "should be all a veteran needs"

Is less likely as not less than (50/50 probability) caused by or a result of: 25% chance of being granted.

Is not cause by or a result of: 0% chance of being granted.

I cannot resolve this issue without resort to mere speculation. This rationale will cause problems with getting an increase or service connection.

It also depends on what is in the veterans file, a veteran can have a negative C & P exam but the evidence in his or her file could still warrant an increase or service connection. The veteran can have a positive C & P exam and a negative C & P exam and the veteran should win his or her claim.

Edited September 15, 2010 by pacmanx1

[carlie]

Medical statements regarding possible Service Connection:

Is due to- 100%

More likely than not- Greater than 50%

At least as likely as not- 50% (Benefit of doubt goes to Vet)

Not at least as likely as not- Less than 50%

Is not due to- 0%