The veteran's claim for an increased rating for paroxysmal atrial tachycardia is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and providing proper notice under the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000.
The deciding factor: The decision requires further examination and evidence collection to determine the current status of the veteran's condition and whether he meets the criteria for an increased rating.
- Claimed conditions
- paroxysmal atrial tachycardia
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- February 2, 2006
- Citation
- 0602928
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,175 · Granted: 22% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed 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. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0602928.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's diabetes mellitus, type II, is granted as presumptively related to his in-service exposure at Nakhon Phanom RTAFB. Service connection for chronic renal disease, anemia, and paroxysmal atrial tachycardia are also granted based on their proximate relationship to service-connected conditions.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities did not preclude him from securing and following substantially gainful employment during the period from January 24, 2008 through September 8, 2009.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied readjudication of the claim for service connection for paroxysmal atrial tachycardia because no new and relevant evidence was received, despite the Veteran submitting VA treatment records and a personal statement.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for TDIU is denied as he was employed prior to May 19, 2009 and his service-connected disabilities did not render him unemployable at that time.
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.