The Board has been directed to consider whether the veteran is entitled to separate, compensable evaluations for injuries to muscle groups I and II and scars associated with service-connected injury. The claims are being remanded for further development.
The deciding factor: The Court has directed that the Board should consider whether the veteran is entitled to separate, compensable evaluations for injuries to muscle groups I and II and scars associated with service-connected injury.
- Claimed conditions
- gunshot wound to the chest, injury to muscle group I and II
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 2, 2005
- Citation
- 0502465
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,515 · Granted: 20% (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 0502465.
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 cause of death due to lack of evidence of a current disability or in-service incurrence.
- Granted
The Veteran's service-connected schizophrenia reaction, gunshot wound to the chest, and left ulna fracture render him in need of regular aid and attendance due to his condition. The Board granted Special Monthly Compensation (SMC) based on aid and attendance.
- Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities render him incapable of securing or following a substantially gainful occupation at all times during the pendency of the appeal.
- Partly granted
The Veteran's claim for a rating increase for his gunshot wound was granted, but his pension benefits were denied due to his felony conviction. The Board found that the denial of pension benefits was not clear and unmistakable error.
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.