The Board has decided to remand the case for additional development, including obtaining clinical records from the Veteran's in-service hospitalization and providing her with a VA examination.
The deciding factor: Additional efforts are needed to obtain the Veteran's service treatment records and clinical records related to her in-service hospitalization. A VA examination is also required to determine if the evidence of record is consistent with the removal of her spleen at that time.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals of splenectomy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- May 14, 2013
- Citation
- 1315776
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 1315776.
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.
- Partly granted
The Veteran's service connection claims for residuals of splenectomy, diabetes mellitus type 2 (diabetes), and neuropathy of the right lower extremity have been denied.,Service connection was not granted for residuals of splenectomy due to lack of evidence of a current disability. Service connection was also denied for diabetes as it was not incurred in service or related to a service-connected condition. The Veteran's neuropathy claim was denied because there is no link between the right ankle injury and the current symptoms.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims of service connection for idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, anemia, residuals of splenectomy, and immune system disorder (depressed immune system) due to insufficient development. The gynecological claim remains denied.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete documentation of informed consent forms for the hernia repair procedures. The Veteran is seeking compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that additional substantive development is necessary prior to further appellate review of the claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 benefits due to missing consent forms related to the October 2013 and March 2014 hernia repair procedures at a VA medical facility.
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.