The Board has remanded the case to the RO for additional evidentiary and due process development.
The deciding factor: The Board's decision is being remanded because of procedural issues related to the submission of evidence and argument by appellant's attorney.
- Claimed conditions
- gunshot wound residuals of the abdominal region (Muscle Group XIX), gunshot wound residuals of the lumbar region (Muscle Group XX), peritoneal adhesions
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 12, 2005
- Citation
- 0500925
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,642 · Granted: 19% (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 0500925.
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.
- Partly granted
The Board granted an effective date of August 15, 2011, for the award of service connection for peritoneal adhesions and associated scar of the mid-abdomen but denied earlier effective dates for a seizure disorder and DEA benefits. A rating of 30 percent was also granted for peritoneal adhesions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's appeal for a higher rating for peritoneal adhesions with small intestine involvement status post laparotomy was denied. The Board also found that the claim of service connection for renal cyst, as secondary to service-connected peritoneal adhesions, needs further examination and remanded.
- Denied
The Veteran's request for an increased rating in excess of 50 percent for her service-connected peritoneal adhesions with IBS was denied. The maximum schedular rating allowed under the applicable diagnostic codes has been awarded.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for duodenal ulcer and gastric disorders due to a duty-to-assist error. The Veteran's other gastric disorders are being evaluated, including whether they are proximately due or aggravated by his service-connected duodenal ulcer.
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.