Caring. Effective. Efficient.

BVA Erred in Denying Service Connection for Sleep Apnea

BVA Erred in Denying Service Connection for Sleep Apnea

The BVA denied a veteran service connection for  sleep apnea, and made several errors in doing so.

First, it failed to consider the nexus between the veteran's deviated septum treatment in service and his sleep apnea.

Second, the BVA Veterans Law Judge considered, without any explanation, routine lay statements of symptoms of sleep apnea as "not credible". The VA agreed that the BVA judge erred when he rejected  a  veteran's statements describing in-service sleep deprivation and continuity of symptomatology for his sleep apnea as “not credible” on the grounds that service treatment records were silent for such complaints. 

BVA Judges routinely find veterans "not credible" - and their findings rarely have support in the fact or law.  Please contact Attig | Steel if you have a BVA decision which based its denial on an allegation that your veteran client  lacked credibility.

The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims vacated this BVA decision denying service connection for sleep apnea and remanded it with instructions to follow in readjudicating the case.

Attig | Steel coordinated with the law firm of Gordon & Doner to handle the veteran's remand to the BVA.

Link to the BVA Decision on CAVC Website.

Link to the Joint Motion to Remand the CAVC Website.

Case Details

OGC Attorney: Shereen Marcus

Veteran Representation at CAVC: Chris Attig (link to bio)

Board of Veterans Appeals Veterans Law Judge:Harvey P. Roberts

Regional Office: Los Angeles, California VARO

Vets’ Rep at BVA: Adam G. Werner

Date of BVA Decision: September 12, 2016

Date of CAVC Remand Order: June 15, 2017

Recent Cases

This case involves an Army veteran who served on active duty in 1991 and then from 2008 to 2009 who was seeking a service-connected major depressive disorder rating in excess of 30%. The appeal was resolved through a joint motion to remand. ISSUE ON… Read More
This case involves a survivor’s claim for entitlement to Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC). The appellant’s late-husband served in the US Air Force from 1964 – 1984, and passed away from a rare form of non-Hodgkins lymphom… Read More
This case involved a US Army veteran (1967 to 1971) who was seeking service connection for hypertension, congestive heart failure, Type II diabetes, stroke, and atrial fibrillation due to agent orange exposure in Thailand during the Vietnam war. The… Read More

See More Appellate Results

Taking Point! Blog

Mar
2
In January 2021, the loss of use of a reproductive organ for SMC purposes was the focus of a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals Veterans Claims issued a precedential opinion in Bria v. Wilkie.   The panel consisted of Judge Mere… Read More
Feb
26
In January 2021, the VA rating for prostate cancer was the focus of a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals Veterans Claims issued a precedential opinion in Bailey v. Wilkie.   The panel consisted of Chief Judge Bartley (who… Read More
Feb
26
  Bold and unapologetically honest, Pam Keith is a refreshing political voice you need to follow right now.  She smoothly articulates the most rocky and controversial topics of our time.  It is no surprise that this attorney with 25 years of expe… Read More
Feb
12
In November 2020, a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals Veterans Claims issued a precedential opinion in Holmes v. Wilkie.   In it, the Court laid out a road map for Veterans trying to get the correct VA rating for migraines… Read More

Read the "Taking Point!" Blog