The Board has remanded the case due to new evidence submitted by the veteran and her representative, requiring further review of the claim.
The deciding factor: The decision was remanded because the RO failed to consider the newly submitted evidence from the Smith Center and Kelsey-Seybold Clinic in the context of the veteran's claim.
- Claimed conditions
- rhinitis/sinusitis/trigeminal neuralgia, right ovarian cyst
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 22, 2008
- Citation
- 0802266
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 0802266.
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 remanded the cases due to missing military personnel records and service treatment records, which need to be obtained for a thorough review.
- Denied
The Veteran's right ovarian cyst with ovarian failure does not require continuous treatment, and thus is not entitled to a compensable rating.
- Denied
The Board has determined that the Veteran's gynecological disorder, including a right ovarian cyst and endometriosis (manifested by dysmenorrhea), did not preexist service or become worse during service. Therefore, service connection for these conditions is denied.
- Denied
The Veteran's left breast scar is not considered disabling and does not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation.,The Veteran’s right ovarian cyst does not require continuous treatment and does not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation.,The Veteran’s migraines do not have characteristic prostrating attacks averaging one in two months, thus not meeting the criteria for a compensable evaluation.,The Veteran's acne on her face, chest, and back is superficial and does not cover an area of 144 square inches or greater, thus not meeting the criteria for a compensable evaluation.
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.