The RO has granted service connection for the residuals of an appendectomy and assigned a noncompensable (0%) disability rating. The RO also denied compensation pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A. � 1151 for the residuals of a transurethral resection of the prostate and a vasectomy. These issues are being remanded due to the lack of an SOC.
The deciding factor: The appeal is not complete as no Statement of the Case has been issued on the compensation claims under 38 U.S.C.A. � 1151 for the residuals of a transurethral resection of the prostate and a vasectomy.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals of an appendectomy, residues of a transurethral resection of the prostate, residues of a vasectomy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- April 13, 2012
- Citation
- 1213687
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 1213687.
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 issues of increased ratings for residuals of an appendectomy and appendectomy scars were dismissed due to a procedural error in the form used by the Veteran.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claim of service connection for residuals of an appendectomy due to insufficient evidence in the VA examination report. The Veteran's claim will be reconsidered with a new examination.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's right shoulder disorder appeal was dismissed due to withdrawal of the claim.,Service connection for tinnitus is granted, with evidence indicating it started in service and continued.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's spouse, L.H., is the caregiver and has been providing personal care services for him. The Board found that participation in the PCAFC would significantly enhance his ability to live safely at home. However, the claim was remanded due to incomplete caregiver training and assessment.
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.