The Board has remanded the Veteran's claim for a TDIU prior to March 6, 2012 due to insufficient evidence regarding his income and employment history.
The deciding factor: The decision is based on the need for additional development of the Veteran's work history and income information.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral interstitial fibrosis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 19, 2018
- Citation
- 18112385
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 18112385.
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 cases for further development and examination to determine the current severity of the Veteran's service-connected conditions, including bilateral interstitial fibrosis, diabetes mellitus, and sleep apnea. The issues include determining if the Veteran's diabetes is secondary to his service-connected condition and whether he had undiagnosed sleep apnea during service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to inadequate nexus opinion and requests for additional medical records. The Veteran's respiratory disability, claimed as asbestosis, is being reviewed again.
- Granted
The Veteran's prostate cancer is granted service connection based on in-service herbicide exposure.,The Veteran's bilateral interstitial fibrosis claim is remanded for further examination and opinion regarding the relationship to service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that further development is needed to include obtaining private treatment records and an etiology opinion on the Veteran's respiratory disability, including exposure to asbestos. The case is REMANDED for these actions.
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.