The Board has remanded the case due to procedural errors and the need for additional development, including obtaining medical opinions on service connection and rating issues.
The deciding factor: Procedural deficiencies in VCAA notice and lack of a proper examination have been identified.
- Claimed conditions
- arthralgia, migratory rheumatoid arthralgia, degenerative arthritis of multiple joints
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 17, 2004
- Citation
- 0415585
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 999 · Granted: 31% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted 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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0415585.
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 the Veteran's claim for special monthly compensation based on the need for aid and attendance due to his service-connected disabilities.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the claim for a left ankle condition to obtain an addendum opinion addressing the nature and etiology of the Veteran's tarsal tunnel syndrome, or any other possible ankle nerve disability.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to errors in the duty to assist and insufficient medical opinions regarding the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral shoulder disabilities. The Veteran is seeking service connection for these disabilities, which she contends are related to her active-duty service or her service-connected knee condition.
- Denied
The Board denied the appellant's claim for special monthly pension (SMP) based on the need for aid and attendance or housebound status due to insufficient evidence showing she needed regular assistance, was bedridden, or housebound.
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.