BVA Case 24-2811: Back

Thereafter,in September 2018,the Board found that the appellant had submitted new and material evidence to reopen his previously denied claims for mononucleosis (also claimed as tonsilitis,throat,and swollen glands) and a heart murmur,and the Board remanded for further development the matters of entitlement to disability compensation for throat and heart disorders.

at 4068, and he opined that the appellant's CAD was less likely than not related to service,R.

Regarding the appellant's throat condition, the parties agreed that the Board failed to explain the adequacy of the January 2020 examination report given that the examiner found no history of nose,throat,larynx,or pharynx conditions,including sinusitis,despite records reflecting the appellant's history of sinusitis treatment.

In December 2022, the Board found that the January 2020 VA examinations were inadequate and remanded the appellant's claims for further development.

With respect to the appellant's heart, the clinician opined that his claimed condition was less likely than not related to service.

She indicated,however,that the appellant is diagnosed with no evidence of the claimed throat condition (including residuals of mononucleosis)on today's exam[ination], and she opined that his claimed condition was less likely than not related to in-service exposure to toxins.

Regarding his heart,the examiner diagnosed CAD and aortic valve sclerosis and opined that these conditions were less likely than not related to toxin exposure while in service.

Parties'Arguments The appellant argues that the Board failed to ensure substantial compliance with its December 2022 remand instructions,Appellant's Brief (Br.