BVA decisions by condition

Facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis: BVA grant rates and what wins

From 2018 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis issue in 1,135 decisions. It granted the facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis issue in 16.6% of them, below the 19.9% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 37.2%, and remanded it in 46.2%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 30.8% were granted.

Decisions

1,135

2018–2026

Granted

16.6%

All conditions: 19.9%

Granted on the merits

30.8%

Granted ÷ (granted + denied)

Remanded

46.2%

Denied: 37.2%

Facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis outcomes by year

YearDecisionsGrantedDeniedRemanded
2018
137
14.6%41.6%44.5%
2019
139
15.8%38.8%47.5%
2020
126
9.5%44.4%44.4%
2021
135
14.1%37.8%47.4%
2022
128
14.8%28.1%57.0%
2023
145
17.2%37.2%45.5%
2024
151
21.2%30.5%49.7%
2025
110
21.8%36.4%39.1%
2026
64
23.4%43.8%31.3%

Evidence in granted and denied facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis decisions

For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Positive nexus opinion16265.3%22.0%+43.3 pts
Treating physician opinion5861.0%28.6%+32.3 pts
Favorable VA exam13955.9%25.3%+30.6 pts
Claimed as secondary27948.5%25.9%+22.5 pts
Private medical opinion32442.6%25.2%+17.5 pts
Combat service6134.3%30.6%+3.7 pts
Lay statement87526.9%48.6%−21.7 pts
  • The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 64.9% of the decisions that granted facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis.
  • The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 30.3% of grants and 9.2% of denials.

Negative evidence in the record

An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Negative nexus opinion52029.2%32.6%−3.4 pts
Unfavorable VA exam79728.3%41.0%−12.7 pts

Why the Board granted or denied facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis

Most common reasons in grants

  1. Current diagnosis established19
  2. Caused by the service-connected disability16
  3. Service connection established8
  4. Criteria for 10 percent rating met4
  5. 10 percent rating granted3
  6. Service connection granted3
  7. Raises reasonable possibility of substantiating claim2
  8. Rated under diagnostic code 82052

Most common reasons in denials

  1. No current diagnosis54
  2. VA examiner: less likely than not related to service31
  3. Preponderance of the evidence against the claim29
  4. No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis28
  5. Service records negative or silent26
  6. Current diagnosis established16
  7. Criteria for service connection not met8
  8. Aggravated by the service-connected disability5

Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.

Recent facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis decisions

Granted

Citation Nr. A26040688D. Johnson · 2026

Current diagnosis of essential tremor.; Private medical opinion found it more likely than not related to TERA.; Board found private opinion more persuasive than VA opinion.

Citation Nr. A26031757Michael J. Skaltsounis · 2026

VA examiner noted dysphonia likely secondary to tracheostomy-related trauma; Examiner's opinion found inadequate as it denied service connection despite acknowledging intermediate factor; Evidence in approximate balance, benefit of doubt applied

Citation Nr. 26004241David A. Brenningmeyer · 2026

VA examination confirmed cranial nerve impairment manifested by drooling.; VA examiner provided positive nexus opinion linking drooling to service-connected myasthenia gravis.; Opinion based on examination, review of claims file, medical literature, and thorough rationale.

Denied

Citation Nr. A26037314M. C. Wilson · 2026

No competent evidence of current slurred speech; No persistent symptoms of slurred speech post-service; In-service lip injury conceded, but no link to slurred speech established

Citation Nr. A26036837H.M. Walker · 2026

No current temporomandibular joint condition diagnosed.; Insufficient objective evidence for diagnosis.; Service treatment records showed temporomandibular joint within normal limits.

Citation Nr. 26004672B. Mullins · 2026

No medical opinions supported a direct link between the in-service fall and the subsequent hemiparesis.; VA doctor opined hemiparesis was due to post-service conditions (hypertension, diabetes), not in-service fall.; VA opinions found mood disorder not pathophysiologically related to hemiparesis and did not aggravate it.

Rules that apply to facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis claims

Research your facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis case

Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.

Open VA Law Explorer

How these numbers are calculated

  • Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
  • “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
  • The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2018–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.