The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and TDIU are being remanded due to the need for additional examinations and consideration of his service-connected disabilities.
The deciding factor: The case is being returned to the AOJ for further development as required by the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims' decision in Olson v. Principi, which requires a new examination when there is an assertion of an increase in severity since the last examination.
- Claimed conditions
- fracture of left mandible ramus, fracture of right femur
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 1, 2014
- Citation
- 1443718
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 1443718.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities render him unable to obtain and maintain gainful employment, and the Board has referred this case for consideration of an extraschedular TDIU under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b).
- Granted
The Board has determined that the October 1968 rating decision was clearly and unmistakably erroneous in failing to award an 80% evaluation for the service-connected fracture of the right femur with femoral and sciatic nerve damage and complete foot drop under Diagnostic Code 8520. To this extent, the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for the award of the 80% evaluation is granted, effective January 1, 1969.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
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.