The VA is required to provide the appellant with proper notice regarding her DIC claim, including information about any previously service-connected conditions and what evidence she needs to submit. The case will be remanded for this purpose.
The deciding factor: The RO's previous decision was not compliant with Hupp v. Nicholson due to inadequate notification of the need for new evidence related to a condition not yet service connected.
- Claimed conditions
- removal of semilunar cartilage of the left knee
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 17, 2008
- Citation
- 0843452
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 0843452.
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 case due to inadequate examination reports and needs further clarification on whether the Veteran's symptoms are related to the removal of semilunar cartilage.
- Granted
The Veteran's appeals for increased ratings were withdrawn, and his left knee disorder was rated at 30 percent effective January 1, 2010. The rating includes limitation of extension to 30 degrees and instability from January 1, 2010.
- 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.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
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.