The Board has remanded the case for further development and examination, including obtaining medical records and conducting examinations to determine the current severity of service-connected postoperative residuals of an osteoma of the left iliac crest. The issues of service connection for lower extremity, foot, and back disabilities as residuals of the service-connected postoperative left iliac crest osteoma or as proximately due to or the result of the service-connected postoperative left iliac crest osteoma are also remanded.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the instructions in its February 2001 Remand were not fully carried out and requested additional development, including obtaining medical records and conducting examinations to address specific concerns about the veteran's service-connected condition and related disabilities.
- Claimed conditions
- osteoma of the left iliac crest, lower extremity disabilities, foot disabilities, back disabilities
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- March 28, 2003
- Citation
- 0305997
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,515 · Granted: 20% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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 0305997.
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: Denied
The Veteran seeks an earlier effective date for his TDIU and SMC awards, but the Board finds no evidence of a factual increase in disability within one year prior to the claim.,SMC is awarded based on the Veteran's single service-connected disability (heart disability) rated at 100% disabling.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the claims for service connection for left and right foot and ankle disabilities due to insufficient evidence.
- Whole decision: Denied
The appeal of a timely request for Higher-Level Review of the Veteran's entitlement to service connection for his claimed back and neck disabilities is denied.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to errors in obtaining necessary examinations and opinions, particularly regarding the Veteran's service-connected disabilities and their impact on his employability.
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.