The appeal is remanded for further development to ensure the Veteran's due process rights are met, including an adequate VA examination and review of recent medical records.
The deciding factor: The Court found that the August 2004 VA compensation and pension examination was inadequate and instructed the Board to provide the Veteran with a new examination or inform him why none would be provided. The Board also needs to make a finding on the Veteran's credibility based on his combat service in Vietnam.
- Claimed conditions
- Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD) of the cervical spine, Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD) of the lumbar spine, Pes planus
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 16, 2009
- Citation
- 0909705
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,088 · Granted: 33% (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 0909705.
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 the appellant's claim for an increased rating for pes planus of the left foot as he failed to report for a necessary VA examination without good cause.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that there is a need for additional medical examination and opinion to address the Veteran's claim of service connection for a back disability, including DDD of the lumbar spine. The current VA opinions are deemed inadequate due to their failure to consider the Veteran's lay reports of in-service injury and continuous symptomatology since service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a VA examiner's opinion regarding whether his service-connected disabilities result in loss of use and if so, whether he requires aid and attendance without considering such disability/ies. The Veteran also needs to be considered for SMC R1 based on the need for regular aid and attendance.
- Denied
The Board found no evidence of a current bilateral foot pain disorder related to service and denied the claim.
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.