The Board remands the case for another VA examination to determine if the Veteran's bilateral bunions, pes planus, and hallux valgus were aggravated by service.
The deciding factor: Without access to the claims file, including the service treatment records, the previous examiner could not provide a fully informed opinion regarding aggravation of pre-existing conditions during service.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral bunions, pes planus, hallux valgus
- How they argued it
- Aggravation of a pre-existing condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 26, 2009
- Citation
- 0907198
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,500 · Granted: 17% (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 0907198.
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
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for bilateral plantar fasciitis, finding that the Veteran's pre-existing pes planus condition was aggravated by service. The effective date is August 15, 2025.
- 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.
- Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral plantar fasciitis with pes planus, finding that her current condition had its onset during active military service.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for service connection for pes planus was dismissed because he filed a supplemental claim after the AOJ had already addressed his initial denial, violating the AMA rule against concurrent jurisdiction.
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.