The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a more contemporaneous examination of the veteran's circumcision residuals.
The deciding factor: The RO needs to conduct a VA examination to assess the nature and extent of the veteran's residuals of a circumcision.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals of a circumcision
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- November 15, 2000
- Citation
- 0029894
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0029894.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of a circumcision due to new and material evidence. The case is now remanded for further development, including obtaining medical opinions regarding the nature and etiology of any genitourinary disability, to include pain and scarring.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn, and all claims have been dismissed.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran seeks service connection for a left foot condition, circumcision residuals, and pseudofolliculitis barbae. He also claims compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for additional disability resulting from a June 1990 dental extraction.,The Veteran contends that he has residual numbness in his left front gums and teeth due to a June 1990 VA dental extraction, which resulted in complications such as numbness of the lower lip or tongue. The examiner will determine if this disability is related to carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of VA.,The Veteran claims service connection for a left foot condition, circumcision residuals, and pseudofolliculitis barbae. He also seeks compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for additional disability resulting from a June 1990 dental extraction.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete service medical records and a need for additional development, including obtaining VA examination results.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.