BVA Case 24-4734: Back

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · December 31,2025 · JAQUITH, Judge

Outcome
Vacated / Remanded
Decision Date
December 31,2025
Judge
JAQUITH, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

BackCervicalSleep_ApneaHipHeadacheHypertension

Issues on Appeal

Service ConnectionSleep Apnea

Why It Was Decided This Way

August 2018 Board Denial In August 2018,the Board denied service connection for sleep apnea and a headache disorder.

In assessing his claim for sleep apnea, the Board found that the veteran had been diagnosed with OSA and that he had reported that he was often around burning oils, inhaled sand,dust,and smoke, and was treated with experimental medicine in service.

After the veteran appealed this decision to the Court,the parties moved to vacate the portion of the August 2018 Board decision that denied service connection for sleep apnea and a headache disorder because the August 2012 VA exams did not address the etiology of either condition.

February 2021 Board Denial In February 2021,the Board denied service connection for sleep apnea and a headache disorder.

The Board determined that the third element of service connection was not is afforded the benefit of the doubt[,]and the second element of service connection has been met.

4 Case:24-4734 Page: 5 of 13 Filed:12/31/2025 met for either condition based on the September 2020 VA medical opinions,which found no nexus between either of these conditions and the veteran's active duty service.

Although the Board noted that the veteran was competent to report symptoms, he was not competent to offer an opinion as to the etiology of his current disorders due to the medical complexity of the matters involved.

The veteran appealed this decision to the Court,and the parties agreed to the terms of a joint motion for remand (JMR)because the Board erred by not obtaining addendum opinions to ensure that the duty to assist was satisfied.

Authorities Cited

Allday v. BrownArdison v. BrownBarr v. NicholsonDeloach v. ShinsekiDyment v. PrincipiDyment v. WestEuzebio v. McFletcher v. DerwinskiGilbert v. DerwinskiGreen v. DerwinskiKay v. PrincipiKutscherousky v. WestMahl v. PrincipiMiller v. WilkieMolitor v. ShulkinMonzingo v. ShinsekiNolen v. GoberRodriguez v. PeakeSee Tadlock v. McSee Wise v. ShinsekiShedden v. PrincipiStefl v. NicholsonStegall v. WestTucker v. WestWalleman v. Mc

Denial Type

No Nexus|Duty To Assist|Inadequate Exam

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 →