The Board has remanded the case for a Travel Board hearing due to the Veteran's request and will not assign a rating or effective date as this is a procedural issue.
The deciding factor: The Veteran requested a Travel Board hearing, which necessitates scheduling one before any further action can be taken on his claims.
- Claimed conditions
- diabetes mellitus type II, glaucoma
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 29, 2016
- Citation
- 1644743
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 1644743.
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 claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
- Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's claims for earlier effective dates for service connection of coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus type II, diabetic nephropathy, and prostate cancer. The issues of entitlement to special monthly compensation based on housebound status and eligibility for Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) are remanded.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for erectile dysfunction, which is secondary to the Veteran's service-connected diabetes mellitus type II and panic disorder with insomnia. The decision finds that the evidence is at least evenly balanced as to whether the erectile dysfunction was caused by these conditions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's eligibility for PCAFC benefits is remanded due to the AOJ's failure to address whether it is in the best interest of the Veteran to participate in the program. The Board finds that the Veteran has been in need of personal care services for at least six continuous months based on an inability to perform the ADL of bathing.
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.