The Board is remanding the case to obtain additional medical records and possibly a VA examination, as well as readjudicate the claims under all appropriate statutory and regulatory provisions.
The deciding factor: Additional evidence is needed from the veteran's last known treatment provider in Tucson, Arizona, and/or a VA examination for 'cold injury' to determine if any cold injury residuals are present and their etiology.
- Claimed conditions
- arthritis of the knees, arthritis of the hands, including right hand contusion residuals
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 8, 2006
- Citation
- 0606607
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 103 · Granted: 13% (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 0606607.
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 has determined that new and relevant evidence has been presented to warrant readjudication of the claim for service connection for arthritis of the knees, elbows, and hands. The matter is being remanded for further consideration on a secondary basis due to the Veteran's assertions regarding his hips locking and falling into foxholes.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's eligibility for the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is being remanded due to a lack of adequate explanation in the VA opinion regarding whether the Veteran requires personal care services based on the criteria listed in 38 U.S.C. § 1720G(a)(2)(C) and 38 C.F.R. § 71.20(a)(3).
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims of service connection for arthritis, eye conditions, hypertension, and lower back pain are being remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions and consideration of new evidence.
- Denied
The Board found the Appellant's discharge from service was due to willful and persistent misconduct, which bars him from receiving VA benefits. The appeal is 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.