CAVC Case 15-0594: Sleep Apnea
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · 2014-12-09 · LANCE, 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
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
Service ConnectionReopenSleep Apnea
Why It Was Decided This Way
He appeals,through counsel,a December 9,2014, Board of Veterans'Appeals (Board)decision that denied entitlement to service connection for right hand arthritis and determined that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen claims for entitlement to service connection for a nasal disorder,sleep apnea,and diabetes mellitus.
For the reasons that follow,the Court will reverse the Board's determination that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen the appellant's nasal disorder claim,vacate that part of the December 9,2014, decision denying entitlement to service connection for right hand arthritis,and remand those matters for further proceedings consistent with this decision.
The Court will affirm that part of the Board's decision finding that new and material evidence had not been 1 The Board's determination that the appellant had submitted new and material evidence with respect to his claim for entitlement to service connection for right hand arthritis and its subsequent reopening of that claim are favorable determinations,which the Court cannot disturb.
Finally,as the appellant presents no argument concerning the Board's determination that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen his diabetes mellitus claim, the Court finds that he has abandoned that matter and will, accordingly,dismiss the appeal as to that issue.
ANALYSIS The appellant first contends that the Board clearly erred when it determined that he had not submitted new and material evidence to reopen his nasal disorder claim,as it did not consider whether the new evidence satisfied the low threshold set forth in Shade v.
Second,he asserts that the Board clearly erred when it determined that he had not submitted new and material evidence to reopen his sleep apnea claim,as it discounted his newly submitted buddy statements regarding the onset of his sleep apnea as duplicative of the evidence already of record,rather than treating them as corroborative.
In the alternative,he argues that the Board failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases in support of those determinations.
Finally,the appellant contends that the Board failed to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases to support its denial of service connection for right hand arthritis,as it misstated the date of onset of his arthritis,did not adequately explain why it determined that a May 2011 VA medical opinion was adequate,and did not discuss whether service connection was warranted on the basis of continuity of symptomatology.
Authorities Cited
Denial Type
Credibility|No Nexus|Not New Material
Find Similar Decisions 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 →