The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient examination findings and requests for a new VA examination.
The deciding factor: The examination did not provide sufficient information about the Veteran's upper extremities, and there were discrepancies between previous examinations.
- Claimed conditions
- diabetic neuropathy, peripheral neuropathy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- June 19, 2018
- Citation
- 18112351
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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 18112351.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's spouse is seeking to be substituted as the appellant for claims of service connection filed by the Veteran in August 2017. The AOJ has not yet determined whether she meets the requirements to substitute, and this issue must be remanded.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's TDIU claim is remanded due to insufficient examination addressing all aspects of his service-connected diabetes mellitus, including diabetic neuropathy.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities, finding that his service-connected conditions do not preclude him from securing or following substantially gainful employment.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board found that the appellant is eligible to receive fees from past due benefits awarded in the portion of the June 2024 rating decision granting higher ratings for bilateral upper and lower extremity diabetic neuropathy. The appeal was denied regarding eligibility for fees related to a chest scar rating.
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.