The veteran is seeking an earlier effective date for a 10 percent rating for his service-connected incurvated dystrophic nail of the left great toe. The Board has remanded this case to the RO for further action, including issuance of a statement of the case (SOC).
The deciding factor: The Board did not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of the claim as it pertained to an effective date issue.
- Claimed conditions
- incurvated dystrophic nail of the left great toe
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 14, 2006
- Citation
- 0617397
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,454 · Granted: 23% (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 0617397.
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.
- Denied
The Board denied an increased rating for the service-connected incurvated dystrophic nail of the left great toe, and the RO subsequently granted a 10 percent rating effective from May 20, 2000. The veteran is now seeking an earlier effective date.
- Dismissed
The Board dismissed the appeal as there was no valid notice of disagreement filed regarding the increased rating for the service-connected incurvated dystrophic nail of the left great toe.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claim for an effective date prior to May 20, 1992 for the grant of service connection for incurvated dystrophic nail, left great toe. The RO assigned a non-compensable rating effective from May 20, 1992.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
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.