The veteran's appeal is remanded for further development of the record, including scheduling a VA examination to assess the severity of his service-connected FMF with anemia and splenomegaly during flare-ups.
The deciding factor: The Board finds that another VA examination should be scheduled to address the severity of the disability during flare-ups due to its frequent nature.
- Claimed conditions
- familial Mediterranean fever (FMF), anemia, splenomegaly
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- May 10, 2006
- Citation
- 0613632
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,643 · Granted: 15% (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 0613632.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's eligibility for PCAFC benefits is remanded due to the AOJ's failure to address whether it is in the best interest of the Veteran to participate in the program. The Board finds that the Veteran has been in need of personal care services for at least six continuous months based on an inability to perform the ADL of bathing.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for earlier effective dates and increased ratings are being remanded due to the need for further review of the evidence. The Board is unable to determine if there was a factual increase in disability prior to the effective dates requested, or if service connection should be granted based on the current evidence.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has granted service connection for hepatitis C and its secondary effects on other conditions, including cirrhosis of the liver, diabetes mellitus type II, esophageal varices, hepatic encephalopathy, and splenomegaly.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities did not prevent him from maintaining employment in the construction industry, and he was able to work with accommodations such as sedentary work and frequent breaks. The Board denied his claim for a TDIU.
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.