The Board has ordered further development due to the need for additional evidence. The case will be returned to the RO for this purpose.
The deciding factor: Further development is required as requested by the court in DAV v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, which invalidated previous regulations allowing direct action without remand.
- Claimed conditions
- atherosclerotic heart disease with angina pectoris and essential hypertension
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- July 23, 2003
- Citation
- 0317134
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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0317134.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for atherosclerotic heart disease with angina pectoris and essential hypertension, finding that the condition was not incurred in or aggravated by active duty.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of a right shoulder injury and atherosclerotic heart disease with angina pectoris and essential hypertension, finding no evidence to support these conditions as being related to his military service.
- Denied
The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of a right shoulder injury and atherosclerotic heart disease with angina pectoris and essential hypertension, finding no evidence to support these claims.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
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.