The Board has decided the appeal is remanded due to inadequate opinion regarding the relationship between the Veteran's current bilateral heel conditions and his active duty service. The case will be returned for further development.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner did not address the private examination report findings or any of the lay statements contained in the record, making the opinion inadequate.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral heel condition
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- June 2, 2015
- Citation
- 1523238
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. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 1523238.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for bilateral heel condition and left ankle condition due to lack of new and relevant evidence. The Veteran's existing records have been reviewed, but no additional relevant evidence was provided.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's claimed conditions, including muscle pain and various joint and foot disabilities, are not service-connected as they do not meet the criteria for service connection under direct service connection rules.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim to reopen his service connection for a bilateral heel condition (pes planus) is granted. The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted, but the case is remanded as there is insufficient medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's current foot disability.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for additional development due to inadequate medical opinions in the previous examinations.
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.