"REVERSES the March 22, 2019, Board decision to the extent that is denied service connection for diabetes mellitus and erectile dysfunction and REMANDS the matter for the Board to grant those benefits. With respect to hypertension, the Court SETS ASIDE the decision and REMANDS the matter for further proceedings consistent with this decision. DATED: June 18, 2020"
This case had been previously remanded due to the RO's Failure to comply with BVA remand instructions.
In part the C & P examiner failed to discuss or consider the 2006 NAS findings regarding the : "sufficient" link between AO and hypertension---*** see below
( This is a good point to use if the VA denies your claim for HBP due to AO with no other known etiology. Use as a CUE or as a NOD.)
The BVA failed to apply the provisions of M21-1 for Thailand veterans as to their proximity to the perimeter.
I knew our member Kurt Priessman very well and we discussed AO and Thailand a lot. And did many radio shows on it, maybe at another station, then hadit podcast long ago....We have the Thailand directive solely due to his absolute determination to prove that AO was used in Thailand and that certain Thailand vets, by virtue of their MOS, were exposed to it on the base perimeter.
Kurt died last year and his wife does get DIC. It is so upsetting to me to see that the BVA did not properly address this claim in the first instance, but Kurt's work and the Thailand directive ( available under a hadit search) will live in INFAMY and Kurt's work has helped this vet , and others I am sure -even after Kurt's untimely demise last year to AO heart disease.
*** (This regards the accrued claim I have pending on my dead husband's AO HBP, and also the report is here with some AO HBP awards and many remands regarding the NAS ( IOM/NAM) study.
Have Any of you filed for AO Hypertension with the report????
As you can tell from my past articleshere on the report here and this CAVC decision- there are no regulations for AO HBP(HTN) but I feel I made a very strong medical argument on this to Secretary Wilkie and I expect him to provide a decision and regulation on it, as a new AO presumptive.
If he does not decide it to be a new presumptive, and goes against the report , I will sure raise some Hell! Legal hell that is.....
Question
Berta
"REVERSES the March 22, 2019, Board decision to the extent that is denied service connection for diabetes mellitus and erectile dysfunction and REMANDS the matter for the Board to grant those benefits. With respect to hypertension, the Court SETS ASIDE the decision and REMANDS the matter for further proceedings consistent with this decision. DATED: June 18, 2020"
https://efiling.uscourts.cavc.gov/cmecf/servlet/TransportRoom?servlet=CaseSummary.jsp&caseNum=19-2822&incOrigDkt=Y&incDktEntries=Y
This case had been previously remanded due to the RO's Failure to comply with BVA remand instructions.
In part the C & P examiner failed to discuss or consider the 2006 NAS findings regarding the : "sufficient" link between AO and hypertension---*** see below
( This is a good point to use if the VA denies your claim for HBP due to AO with no other known etiology. Use as a CUE or as a NOD.)
The BVA failed to apply the provisions of M21-1 for Thailand veterans as to their proximity to the perimeter.
I knew our member Kurt Priessman very well and we discussed AO and Thailand a lot. And did many radio shows on it, maybe at another station, then hadit podcast long ago....We have the Thailand directive solely due to his absolute determination to prove that AO was used in Thailand and that certain Thailand vets, by virtue of their MOS, were exposed to it on the base perimeter.
Kurt died last year and his wife does get DIC. It is so upsetting to me to see that the BVA did not properly address this claim in the first instance, but Kurt's work and the Thailand directive ( available under a hadit search) will live in INFAMY and Kurt's work has helped this vet , and others I am sure -even after Kurt's untimely demise last year to AO heart disease.
*** (This regards the accrued claim I have pending on my dead husband's AO HBP, and also the report is here with some AO HBP awards and many remands regarding the NAS ( IOM/NAM) study.
Have Any of you filed for AO Hypertension with the report????
As you can tell from my past articleshere on the report here and this CAVC decision- there are no regulations for AO HBP(HTN) but I feel I made a very strong medical argument on this to Secretary Wilkie and I expect him to provide a decision and regulation on it, as a new AO presumptive.
If he does not decide it to be a new presumptive, and goes against the report , I will sure raise some Hell! Legal hell that is.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
2
1
Popular Days
Jun 22
2
Jun 23
1
Top Posters For This Question
Berta 2 posts
jamescripps2 1 post
Popular Days
Jun 22 2020
2 posts
Jun 23 2020
1 post
2 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now