The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining service treatment records and scheduling a VA examination.
The deciding factor: The decision is remanded due to insufficient development of the record and need for an appropriate medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral leg disability.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral leg disability, peripheral vascular disease
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- August 12, 2009
- Citation
- 0930260
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 0930260.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for a neurological examination to determine if any diagnosed radiculopathy or other neurological disability affecting the lower extremities was caused or aggravated by service-connected conditions.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's peripheral vascular disease is being remanded due to a duty to assist error, and an addendum opinion is needed to determine if the condition is related to service or his service-connected CAD.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has granted service connection for diabetes mellitus type II (DM) and coronary artery disease (CAD), finding that the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents during his active duty at Fort McClellan. The Board also found support for secondary service connection for diabetic neuropathy of various extremities, peripheral vascular disease, and gastroparesis as secondary to DM.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has granted the Veteran's application to readjudicate her claim for service connection for a bilateral leg disability. However, the AOJ did not address the merits of the claim on remand and thus the issue is remanded.
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.