ULNAR NERVE PARALYSIS
MELANIE J. MANN · 2026 · Case ID: A26034486
Summary
The Veteran, who served in the United States Marine Corps from July 2009 to April 2014, appeals a rating decision concerning claims for service connection for bilateral upper extremity radiculopathy. The Veteran contended that his left arm numbness was secondary to his service-connected disabilities. The Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) had previously granted service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy in December 2025. The Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) reviewed the case based on evidence of record prior to the November 2024 AOJ rating decision. For the right upper extremity radiculopathy claim, the Board dismissed the appeal as moot because the AOJ had already granted service connection, and the Veteran did not appeal that grant. For the left upper extremity radiculopathy claim, the Board found that the Veteran had a current disability, which was favorably conceded by the AOJ as being due to his service-connected cervical degenerative arthritis. Applying the benefit of the doubt doctrine, the Board found the left upper extremity radiculopathy to be caused by the service-connected cervical degenerative arthritis, thus granting service connection for this condition.
Rationale
AOJ granted service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy.; Veteran did not appeal the AOJ's grant.; Appeal is moot as there is no longer an adverse determination.
Full Decision Text
Citation Nr: A26034486 Decision Date: 04/14/26 Archive Date: 04/14/26 DOCKET NO. 251219-616756 DATE: April 14, 2026 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy is dismissed. Entitlement to service connection for left upper extremity radiculopathy is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. In a rating decision issued in December 2025, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) granted entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy, which constitutes a full grant of the benefit sought on appeal. 2. Resolving all doubt in the Veteran's favor, his left upper extremity radiculopathy is causally related to his service-connected cervical degenerative arthritis. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Because there is no justiciable case or controversy with respect to the claim of entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy, the Veteran's appeal is moot, and the criteria for dismissal have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. 2. The criteria for service connection for left upper extremity radiculopathy have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.310. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from July 2009 to April 2014. For his service, he was awarded the Marine Corps Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Certificate of Commendation (Individual Award) (2), Meritorious Mast (2), Expert Rifle Qualification Badge (3), and Expert Pistol Qualification Badge (2). This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a higher-level review rating decision issued in March 2025 by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office under the modernized appeals system known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA). In December 2025, the Veteran filed a timely Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement) (VA Form 10182) and requested the Direct Review docket. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the November 2024 AOJ rating decision, which preceded the March 2025 higher-level review rating decision. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. Any evidence submitted after the November 2024 rating decision cannot be considered by the Board. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.301, 20.801. Notably, in a December 2025 rating decision, the AOJ granted entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy, effective January 29, 2024. 1. Entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy. The Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105. In essence, a "case or controversy" involving a pending adverse determination to which the appellant has taken exception no longer exists. See Shoen v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 456, 457 (1994). Given the above procedural history, the Board finds that the December 2025 award of entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy (effective January 29, 2024) resulted in a full grant of the benefit sought on appeal, and the Veteran has not initiated an appeal with respect to any part of that decision. See Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156, 1158-59 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Baughman v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 563, 566 (1991). Consequently, there is no longer a pending adverse determination for the Board to adjudicate herein with respect to the issue on appeal. Accordingly, the claim of entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy is moot, and the appeal must be dismissed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. 2. Entitlement to service connection for left upper extremity radiculopathy. The Veteran contends that he has left arm numbness secondary to his service-connected disabilities. See January 2024 Fully Developed Claim (VA Form 21-526EZ). Service connection may be established on a . App. 563, 566 (1991). Consequently, there is no longer a pending adverse determination for the Board to adjudicate herein with respect to the issue on appeal. Accordingly, the claim of entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy is moot, and the appeal must be dismissed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.104. 2. Entitlement to service connection for left upper extremity radiculopathy. The Veteran contends that he has left arm numbness secondary to his service-connected disabilities. See January 2024 Fully Developed Claim (VA Form 21-526EZ). Service connection may be established on a secondary basis for a disability that is shown to be proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disease or injury. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310. Establishing service connection on a secondary basis requires evidence sufficient to show (1) that a current disability exists and (2) that the current disability was either (a) caused by or (b) aggravated by a service-connected disability. See id.; Allen v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 439, 448-49 (1995) (en banc) (finding that an additional disability resulting from aggravation of a nonservice-connected disorder by a service-connected disorder is also compensable under 38 C.F.R. § 3.310). When there is a proximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA must give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107. Regarding a current disability, a September 2024 VA examination report notes a diagnosis of bilateral upper extremity cervical radiculopathy, and the AOJ favorably conceded a current left upper extremity radiculopathy disability in its July 2024, August 2024, November 2024, and March 2025 rating decisions. Under the AMA, the Board is bound by the AOJ's favorable findings. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.104(c). Regarding whether the Veteran's current left upper extremity radiculopathy disability was caused or aggravated by a service connected disability, in its March 2025 rating decision, the AOJ favorably conceded that the Veteran's left upper extremity radiculopathy was due to his cervical degenerative arthritis. As noted above, under the AMA, the Board is bound by the AOJ's favorable findings. See id. The Board notes that the Veteran is also service-connected for cervical degenerative arthritis (effective January 29, 2024). See December 2025 rating decision. Therefore, the Board resolves all doubt in the Veteran's favor and finds that his left upper extremity radiculopathy was caused by his service-connected cervical degenerative arthritis. Therefore, service connection for left upper extremity radiculopathy is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.310. Melanie J. Mann Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Dumas, Rebecca H. The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.