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 assigned
- None in this 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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0919912.
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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.