Veterans Law Judge
Judge Robert C. Scharnberger: BVA decisions and outcomes
From 2017 to 2026, Veterans Law Judge Robert C. Scharnberger signed 2,716 Board decisions covering 4,223 condition issues. The judge granted 14.4% of those issues, denied 30.2% and remanded 52.6%. For the same mix of conditions, the rest of the Board granted 19.3% and remanded 47.3%, so this judge's grant rate is below the Board's and the remand rate is above it.
Decisions
2,716
2017–2026
Issues decided
4,223
One issue per condition per decision
Issues granted
14.4%
Board, same conditions: 19.3%
Issues remanded
52.6%
Board, same conditions: 47.3%
Judges do not choose their cases, and grant rates differ a lot by condition. “Board, same conditions” is what the rest of the Board decided for the same mix of conditions, so the comparison is fair to the judge's docket. This is not a ranking.
Conditions this judge decided most
Each row compares the judge's issues on one condition with the rest of the Board's issues on the same condition. Conditions with fewer than 20 of this judge's issues are left out, because a few decisions can swing the rate.
| Condition | Issues | Granted | Board granted | Remanded | Board remanded |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knee impairment | 406 | 16.7% | 17.3% | 52.7% | 51.1% |
| Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) | 218 | 24.3% | 28.9% | 39.9% | 38.1% |
| Hearing loss | 218 | 16.1% | 19.5% | 37.6% | 34.6% |
| Degenerative arthritis of the spine (spondylosis) | 186 | 14.0% | 20.7% | 48.4% | 46.1% |
| Hypertension | 139 | 8.6% | 17.2% | 63.3% | 48.7% |
| Intervertebral disc syndrome | 136 | 12.5% | 18.7% | 39.0% | 48.1% |
| Shoulder impairment | 125 | 12.0% | 14.3% | 56.8% | 53.0% |
| Sleep apnea syndromes (obstructive central mixed) | 97 | 15.5% | 26.2% | 59.8% | 50.3% |
| Tinnitus | 95 | 44.2% | 39.6% | 18.9% | 22.8% |
| Peripheral nerve disorders | 90 | 15.6% | 20.6% | 55.6% | 51.7% |
| Diabetes mellitus | 82 | 3.7% | 20.0% | 48.8% | 40.0% |
| Ankle impairment | 79 | 22.8% | 16.8% | 43.0% | 50.4% |
| Migraine | 69 | 17.4% | 30.2% | 52.2% | 42.2% |
| Hip impairment | 68 | 8.8% | 14.4% | 48.5% | 53.8% |
| Paralysis of sciatic nerve or external popliteal nerve | 55 | 9.1% | 22.0% | 70.9% | 49.5% |
Judge Robert C. Scharnberger's decisions by year
| Year | Decisions | Granted | Denied | Remanded |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 296 | 18.9% | 47.0% | 57.4% |
| 2018 | 456 | 26.5% | 42.3% | 55.3% |
| 2019 | 561 | 25.8% | 43.3% | 61.7% |
| 2020 | 229 | 24.5% | 42.4% | 58.1% |
| 2021 | 153 | 28.8% | 35.9% | 60.1% |
| 2022 | 99 | 32.3% | 31.3% | 54.5% |
| 2023 | 72 | 30.6% | 36.1% | 58.3% |
| 2024 | 85 | 31.8% | 38.8% | 65.9% |
| 2025 | 753 | 1.5% | 1.3% | 3.1% |
Why the Board granted or denied issues in Judge Robert C. Scharnberger's decisions
Most common reasons in grants
- Current diagnosis established43
- Service connection established12
- In-service noise exposure conceded8
- Caused by the service-connected disability8
- Continuity of symptomatology since service7
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim6
- Aggravated by the service-connected disability5
- Preponderance of evidence favors claim5
Most common reasons in denials
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim111
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis57
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service57
- Current diagnosis established30
- No current diagnosis27
- Service records negative or silent25
- Continuity of symptomatology since service14
- No continuity of symptomatology13
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 Judge Robert C. Scharnberger decisions
Granted
Veteran's STRs silent for skin condition, but telegram mentioned leg wound.; Post-service records show intermittent rash complaints with various diagnoses (eczema, dermatitis, tinea).; Multiple VA opinions found inadequate for failing to address in-service symptoms or all diagnosed conditions.; Veteran provided credible lay testimony of rash starting during service.; Evidence found in approximate balance, resolving doubt in Veteran's favor.
Lay evidence of instability considered.; Normal stability testing throughout appeal period.; 10 percent rating warranted for slight recurrent subluxation/lateral instability.
In-service onset and continuity of symptoms reported by veteran.; VA treatment records reflect bilateral shoulder pain in service.; Separate grant of service connection for left shoulder condition.; Inadequate VA medical opinions on nexus.; Benefit of the doubt applied due to approximate balance of evidence.
Denied
Lay reports of symptoms and functional loss considered.; Objective medical evidence did not support flexion limited to 30 degrees.; Estimated functional loss of 10-15 degrees during flare-ups not sufficient for higher rating.
VA examiners opined conditions were not related to service or toxic exposure.; Examiners associated disabilities with physical nerve compression and degenerative spine issues.; Medical literature did not support a causal link to toxic exposures.
Memory loss attributed to PTSD, not a separate disability.; Lay testimony regarding memory loss not competent to establish separate disability.; Service treatment records noted memory issues, but later records and VA exams linked it to PTSD.
Research your Judge Robert C. Scharnberger case
Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.
How these numbers are calculated
- Issue rates count each condition the Board decided in a decision once, by the outcome of that issue. A decision can grant one issue and deny another.
- The yearly table counts decisions: a decision with a granted issue and a denied issue appears in both columns, so a row can add up to more than 100%.
- "Board, same conditions" weights the rest of the Board's grant and remand rate for each condition by how many of this judge's issues were on that condition. It does not adjust for evidence, hearing type or representation.
- Judges are identified from the signature on each decision. This page is a statistical summary, not an evaluation of any judge.
- The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2017–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.