The Veteran's claims for an increased initial rating and earlier effective date for a separate disability rating for neurological impairment of the left lower extremity are being remanded to allow for further development.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the issue of whether the September 2003 rating decision assigning a separate compensable rating was clearly and unmistakably erroneous in light of the fact that the Veteran was also in receipt of a 60 percent rating under Diagnostic Code 5293 should be addressed by the originating agency.
- Claimed conditions
- neurological impairment of the left lower extremity
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- May 28, 2009
- Citation
- 0919912
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 0919912.
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
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal was dismissed for his claim of service connection for obstructive sleep apnea. The Board found that the issue had been resolved by a prior rating decision granting service connection and assigning a 50% disability rating.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for Parkinsonism, neurological impairments of the upper and lower extremities, and a lumbar cyst are being remanded due to incomplete records regarding alleged radiation exposure during service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the January 2022 decision by the AOJ is legally inadequate due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error, and thus remands the case for further review.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder and remanded claims for other disabilities due to a pre-decisional error in the duty to assist.
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.