The Board has determined that the VA's redefined duties to notify and assist a claimant have not been fulfilled regarding the issue on appeal. The case is therefore being remanded for further development, including obtaining medical examinations and records.
The deciding factor: The VCAA requires notification and assistance in claims processing, which were not fully met in this case.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral pes planus with calluses
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 13, 2005
- Citation
- 0501019
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,440 · Granted: 30% (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 0501019.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board had jurisdiction of the issue of TDIU at the time of its November 2015 decision that denied an increased rating for bilateral pes planus with calluses. The Veteran's unemployability was reasonably raised by the record in the context of his increased rating claim, and the case is now remanded to consider TDIU as an element of the July 2009 increased rating claim.
- Dismissed
The Board has determined that the issue of entitlement to Total Disability Rating Based on Individual Unemployability (TDIU) was not raised by the Veteran or the record as part of his appeal for increased evaluations for bilateral pes planus with calluses. As such, the Board lacks jurisdiction over this matter and refers it to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ).
- Denied
The Board found that the Veteran's bilateral pes planus with calluses is manifested by no greater than moderate impairment, and thus does not meet the criteria for a rating higher than the current 10 percent.
- Denied
The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral pes planus with calluses does not meet or approximate the criteria for a rating greater than 10 percent.
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.