The Board has remanded the case for further development, including determining whether the Veteran's August 6, 2007 surgery was performed by a VA employee and obtaining any consent forms related to that procedure. The examiner is also requested to determine if the Veteran sustained chronic residuals of pneumothorax or pleural effusion due to fault on VA's part in furnishing medical care.
The deciding factor: The Board found that further development is needed, including determining whether Dr. Tobler was a VA employee and obtaining consent forms related to the August 6, 2007 surgery. The examiner will also determine if the Veteran sustained chronic residuals of pneumothorax or pleural effusion due to fault on VA's part in furnishing medical care.
- Claimed conditions
- collapsed right lung
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 21, 2018
- Citation
- 1810857
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 1810857.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining an addendum medical opinion to determine if VA's heart surgery in March 2014 caused additional disability resulting from phrenic nerve injury and whether such disability was due to negligence or lack of informed consent.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case for further development, including verifying whether the Veteran's cardiac surgeon was a VA employee and obtaining an addendum medical opinion regarding any additional pneumothorax or pleural effusion disability due to fault on VA's part.
- Dismissed
The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant requested withdrawal of his claims for service connection for COPD, PTSD, sleep apnea, collapsed right lung, bilateral hearing loss, memory loss, left and right upper extremity peripheral neuropathy, CFS, and right lower extremity radiculopathy.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection due to insufficient evidence and need for additional 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.