CAVC Case 03-1251: Hearing Loss
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · December 15, 2004 · IVERS, Chief Judge
This is a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims — the federal court that reviews Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions, one level above the Board. Court decisions can vacate, reverse, or affirm what the Board did.
Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.
Dependent add-ons start at a 30% rating. Child-only and dependent-parent rates: see the full 2026 pay chart.
2026 base rates, all ratings (veteran alone)
| Rating | Monthly (2026, incl. 2.8% COLA) |
|---|---|
| 10% | $180.42 |
| 20% | $356.66 |
| 30% | $552.47 |
| 40% | $795.84 |
| 50% | $1,132.90 |
| 60% | $1,435.02 |
| 70% | $1,808.45 |
| 80% | $2,102.15 |
| 90% | $2,362.30 |
| 100% | $3,938.58 |
Conditions Claimed
Hearing LossHeartRespiratoryGIEyeHypertension
Referral disclosure: VetAid earns a referral fee if you become a paying REE Medical client through this link — it helps keep this site free. REE Medical provides paid medical evidence; it is not a law firm, VSO, or claims agent, and VetAid has not independently verified its services. VSOs and VA-accredited representatives will help you file your claim at no cost, and no one can guarantee a rating increase.
Issues on Appeal
Hearing LossHeartRespiratoryGIEyeHypertension
Why It Was Decided This Way
Duenas, who is unrepresented, appeals a May 13, 2003, Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) decision in which the Board denied his claims for service connection for (1) a urinary tract infection, (2) poor vision, (3) a hearing-loss disability, (4) a gastrointestinal disorder, (5) asthma, (6) bronchitis, (7) emphysema, (8) heart disease, and (9) hypertension.
With respect to the merits of his claims, the Board concluded that his claimed disabilities "were not incurred in or aggravated by service.
First, he argues that VA did not fulfill its duty to assist him insofar as it failed to provide him with medical examinations with respect to his claims for service connection for heart disease, poor vision, and a hearing-loss disability.
9, 2000), VA had a duty to assist claimants "in developing the facts pertinent to a claim" and that duty to assist included, in certain situations, providing the claimant with a medical examination.
and of a nexus between the in-service injury or disease and the current disability (medical evidence).
The Committees also noted that under VA’s "claimant friendly" and "non-adversarial" adjudicative system, "VA must provide a substantial amount of assistance to a [claimant] seeking benefits.
Under section 5103A(b), VA's duty to assist includes making "reasonable efforts to obtain relevant records," such as service medical records, records from VA health-care facilities, and private medical records, so long as the claimant adequately identifies those records to the Secretary and authorizes the Secretary to obtain them.
Depending on the record of evidence provided by the claimant, or after any such development, VA's duty to assist may also include, under section 5103A(d), providing a claimant with a medical examination: (1) In the case of a claim for disability compensation, the assistance provided by the Secretary under subsection (a) shall include providing a medical examination or obtaining a medical opinion when such an examination or opinion is necessary to make a decision on the claim.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Duty To Assist
Find Similar Precedent for Your Claim
VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.
Run my claim through VetAid →