The Board has determined that the Veteran's current low back strain is not related to his service, and there is no new evidence to reopen a claim of service connection for residuals of frozen feet.,There is no new and material evidence to support reopening the claim of service connection for residuals of frozen feet.,There is no new and material evidence to support reopening the claim of service connection for bilateral pes planus.,The Veteran's tinea pedis does not warrant a compensable rating.
The deciding factor: The Veteran's back complaints in service were acute, resolved without residual disability, and his current low back strain is not related to his service. There is no new evidence showing that the Veteran has any current disability that is a residual of frozen feet.,The February 2004 rating decision found that there was no current disability attributable to frozen feet, and this finding has not been rebutted by new evidence.,The February 2004 rating decision found that there was no current disability attributable to bilateral pes planus, and this finding has not been rebutted by new evidence.,The Veteran's tinea pedis does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating.
- Claimed conditions
- low back strain, residuals of frozen feet, bilateral pes planus, tinea pedis
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 26, 2009
- Citation
- 0911189
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,699 · Granted: 17% (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 0911189.
What this means for you
A partial grant means some issues were granted while others were denied or remanded — common in multi-issue claims. Look at which issues went which way, and how each was argued.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Dismissed
The Veteran withdrew all his appeals, including the one for an increased rating for low back strain.
- Denied
The Board denied the Appellant's requests for earlier effective dates for his service connection for bilateral pes planus and gynecomastia scar residuals, finding that the earliest possible effective dates are the dates of receipt of the claims.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claims for service connection for athletes' foot, low back strain, and plantar fasciitis due to a lack of a VA examination prior to the August 2020 rating decision.
- Denied
The Veteran's hypertension, bilateral pes planus, PTSD, and anxiety were all denied as service connection was not established based on the evidence of record.,Bilateral pes planus was denied due to lack of current diagnosis.
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.