The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and providing a supplemental opinion regarding secondary service connection for right calf atrophy and weakness. The appeal of the January 2016 rating decision on peripheral neuropathy is held in abeyance.
The deciding factor: The Veteran's claim for service connection for atrophy and weakness of the right calf muscle requires additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and providing a supplemental opinion regarding secondary service connection for the condition. The appeal of the January 2016 rating decision on peripheral neuropathy is held in abeyance.
- Claimed conditions
- atrophy, weakness of the right calf muscle
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- November 17, 2016
- Citation
- 1643701
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 1643701.
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: Granted
The Board has granted an effective date of October 6, 2010 for the Veteran's entitlement to special monthly compensation (SMC) based on his need for aid and attendance of another person due to service-connected disabilities.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient explanation of whether the Veteran had incapacitating episodes and how his eye condition affects him. A new medical examination is required to address these issues.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the medical opinions of record are based on an inaccurate factual premise and requires additional medical opinion to explain how a July 2012 CT scan shows pre-existing abdominal weakness, atrophy, and/or bulge.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's claim for an increased disability rating in excess of 10 percent for left eye uveitis was denied. The case is remanded to consider entitlement to extraschedular ratings and TDIU.
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.