The Board has remanded the case for further development to determine if VA provided the Veteran with hernia repair surgery in 1982 and whether it resulted in damage to his spleen. The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is also being reviewed.
The deciding factor: The Board found that further development was needed to determine the validity of the Veteran's claims, including whether VA provided the alleged surgery and if it resulted in additional disability.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral chondromalacia, damage to the spleen
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- August 22, 2013
- Citation
- 1326869
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 1326869.
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.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for bilateral chondromalacia and dismissed the appeal for service connection for asthma due to untimely filing.
- Denied
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for right and left knee conditions, finding no evidence of in-service injury or disease that led to current diagnoses.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims of entitlement to higher ratings for left and right knee strain due to a lack of adequate examination findings, particularly regarding range of motion testing.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to new evidence received, specifically relevant service department records that existed but were not of record at the time of previous rating decisions. The issue of whether there was clear and unmistakable error in the June 1992 and August 1995 rating decisions is moot as a result.
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.