The Board has determined that the veteran has not submitted new and material evidence to reopen his claim for service connection for post-operative scars as a residual of surgery for hammertoes, which was previously denied in April 1957. The appeal is therefore denied.
The deciding factor: The additional evidence received since the 1957 Board decision does not provide new and material information regarding the veteran's claim for service connection for post-operative scars as a residual of surgery for hammertoes.
- Claimed conditions
- post-operative scars
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- February 17, 2006
- Citation
- 0604597
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,599 · Granted: 37% (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 0604597.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has dismissed the appeal regarding an earlier effective date for service connection of post-operative scars. The appeals for initial ratings and increased ratings are being remanded.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the appellant's request for a higher rating for his bilateral hearing loss and also denied his claim for TDIU due to service-connected disabilities. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating for the hearing loss, as it was rated at 30 percent, which is the maximum schedular rating available under VA guidelines. For TDIU, the Board determined that the appellant's combined disability ratings were sufficient to meet the criteria but concluded he could still maintain substantially gainful employment due to his work history and current physical condition.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional evidence and medical opinions regarding his service-connected knee disabilities.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses is being remanded due to the need for additional VA treatment records from 2009.
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.