The Veteran's skin rash and sores on head are being remanded for additional development.,Peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper extremities is being remanded for additional development.,Peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral lower extremities is being remanded for additional development.,The initial evaluation for coronary artery disease (CAD) in excess of 10 percent prior to July 15, 2010, and in excess of 30 percent on and after July 15, 2001, is being remanded. An earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for CAD remains on appeal.,The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for coronary artery disease (CAD) is being remanded.
The deciding factor: Additional development is needed due to new evidence received after previous decisions.,Additional development is needed due to new evidence received after previous decisions.,Additional development is needed due to new evidence received after previous decisions.,The RO has not yet addressed the initial increased rating claim for coronary artery disease (CAD) in the October 2017 SSOC. The Veteran's TDIU and earlier effective date issues are also on appeal.,An earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for coronary artery disease (CAD) is being remanded as the RO has not yet addressed this issue.
- Claimed conditions
- skin rash, sores on head, peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper extremities, peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral lower extremities, coronary artery disease
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 15, 2018
- Citation
- 18111191
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 18111191.
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.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for additional development due to conflicting opinions regarding service connection for peripheral neuropathy, hypertension, and skin disabilities related to herbicide exposure.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for obstructive sleep apnea, peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper extremities, and peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral lower extremities, finding that there was no evidence linking these conditions to his active service or any related exposure.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for coronary artery disease is being remanded due to the inadequacy of a previous VA examination.
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.