The Veteran's appeal is remanded for further development, including obtaining private medical records and arranging for a VA examination.
The deciding factor: The current examination report was inadequate and the Veteran has identified relevant private treatment records that have not been obtained.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral eye condition, vision problems, prostate disability, blood clots, bladder disability, cancer
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- January 13, 2012
- Citation
- 1201343
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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 1201343.
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 decided to remand the case due to inadequate VA examination and opinion regarding the Veteran's vision problems, which may be related to his service-connected conditions.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the Veteran's prostate disability. The claims for esophageal cancer and Barrett's esophagus remain denied.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the Veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral eye condition should be remanded due to pre-decisional duty-to-assist errors and the need for an updated TERA Memorandum. The Veteran was not provided with a VA examination, and her allegations of exposure during basic training were not addressed.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claim for service connection for BPH due to insufficient evidence regarding its relationship to his service-connected hypertension. The AOJ is instructed to obtain a medical opinion addressing whether BPH was caused or aggravated by his hypertension.
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.