The Board has denied the veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 10 percent for hallux valgus of his left foot, finding that the condition does not present such an exceptional or unusual disability picture as to render impractical the application of the regular schedular standards.
The deciding factor: The evidence did not show that the veteran's hallux valgus caused marked interference with employment or frequent periods of hospitalization.
- Claimed conditions
- hallux valgus
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- December 12, 2007
- Citation
- 0739120
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 0739120.
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: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for hallux valgus, finding no competent and credible evidence linking her current condition to active service.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's left foot metatarsalgia is granted as secondary to his service-connected left foot Lisfranc fracture and other disabilities. The Veteran's TDIU benefits from December 1, 2023 are denied due to his employment as a government tax collector.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to an inadequate VA examination, requiring a new one with a proper evaluation of the Veteran's foot disabilities.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the preexistence and aggravation of foot disabilities during service.
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.