The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including a new VA examination to assess the severity of his service-connected back disability.
The deciding factor: The Board finds that an adequate examination has not been provided and thus requires further evaluation before deciding the claims.
- Claimed conditions
- compression fracture to the thoracic spine, retained foreign bodies
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- May 22, 2017
- Citation
- 1717679
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 1717679.
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.
- Granted
The Veteran is found unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation due to his service-connected disabilities, which include PTSD, left thigh gunshot wound with compound fracture of femur, and other physical conditions. The Board finds that the evidence supports this determination.
- Denied
The Veteran's service-connected residuals of a left calf fragment wound with retained foreign bodies and Muscle Group XI involvement are currently rated as 10 percent disabling, but the evidence does not support an increase to a higher rating.
- Denied
The VA denied an increased evaluation for the veteran's service-connected residuals of gunshot wound to the left knee with surgical absence of patella and retained foreign bodies, currently rated at 20 percent.
- Remanded (sent back)
The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development to determine if multiple disabilities are separately ratable under the rule in Esteban v. Brown and to obtain sufficient medical evidence to rate them accordingly.
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.