The Board is remanding the case to the RO for scheduling a videoconference hearing before a member of the Board due to the VLJ who conducted the July 2008 hearing no longer being employed at the Board.
The deciding factor: The appellant requested a new hearing after her previous hearing VLJ was unavailable, and this request has been granted by the Board.
- Claimed conditions
- cardiovascular disease, metastatic renal cell cancer
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- August 26, 2014
- Citation
- 1438047
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 1438047.
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 Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to a procedural defect in compliance with claims-processing rules. The VA Form 10182 submitted by the Veteran attempted a concurrent election, which is prohibited.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to a duty-to-assist error regarding the Veteran's exposure to asbestos and Agent Orange during service. The claims are now pending for further development.
- Granted
The Veteran's claim for an effective date prior to June 12, 2018, for the grant of service connection for transient global amnesia (also claimed as memory loss) was denied. The Board also denied service connection for cardiovascular disease.
- Denied
The Veteran's pending service connection claims for atrial fibrillation, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and essential tremors were not resolved before his death. The Board denied the appeal as the Appellant did not file a timely request to substitute in her husband's name.
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.