Veterans’ RightsAn independent resource for veterans
← All decisions
Remanded (sent back)PACT Act

The Veteran is seeking service connection for various disabilities including degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine, radiculopathy, left wrist and right wrist avascular necrosis, as well as a higher rating for his cervical spine disability. The appeal also includes an issue regarding TDIU.,The Veteran seeks service connection for bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy, degenerative joint disease of the left ankle, and avascular necrosis of both wrists. He also requests a higher initial rating for his right ankle disability and entitlement to TDIU based on his service-connected disabilities.,,,The Veteran seeks service connection for avascular necrosis of the right wrist due to service-connected right ankle disability. The appeal includes an issue regarding TDIU.,,,

The deciding factor: The Board finds that additional development is needed as per Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016), to ensure a complete record and proper evaluation of the Veteran's claims.,The Board finds that additional development is needed to determine the nature and etiology of the bilateral wrist disabilities and whether any current left ankle disability is related to service-connected right ankle disability.,,,The Board finds that an examination is necessary to assess the relationship between avascular necrosis of the right wrist and service-connected right ankle disability, as well as determine if there is aggravation of the left ankle disability due to service-connected right ankle disability.,,,

Claimed conditions
Degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine, Radiculopathy, bilateral lower extremities, Degenerative joint disease of the left ankle, Avascular necrosis of the right wrist, Avascular necrosis of the left wrist
How they argued it
Not specified
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
October 6, 2017
Citation
1744621

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 1744621.

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.

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.