The Board has remanded the case for additional development and adjudicative action due to missing records.
The deciding factor: The case was remanded by the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims because Volume 1 of the veteran's claims file is missing, which requires the AMC or RO to rebuild it.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals of frozen feet, disorders of the right eye and right upper eyelid
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- March 3, 2006
- Citation
- 0606192
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,242 · Granted: 26% (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 0606192.
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: Denied
The Veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of frozen feet, residuals of frozen hands, a back disability (to include arthritis), bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and a mouth sore disability have all been denied. The Board found no evidence to support the Veteran's assertions that these conditions were incurred in or due to his time in service.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Board has dismissed the appeal due to the Veteran's death while the case was pending before the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has determined that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities make him unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation, warranting a total disability rating based on individual unemployability.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied service connection for residuals of frozen feet in June 1985, concluding that the evidence did not support a finding of service connection. The Veteran's motion alleging clear and unmistakable error (CUE) was denied.
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.