The Board has decided that the evidence is insufficient to determine if the bilateral plantar keratosis was incurred during active duty or training, and thus remands for further development.
The deciding factor: The Board found that there are not sufficient medical opinions addressing whether the condition is due to a disease or an injury, and when it may have occurred during service.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral plantar keratosis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 21, 2018
- Citation
- 18113245
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 18113245.
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.
- Granted
The Veteran's service-connected bilateral pes planus has led to the grant of service connection for related conditions such as hammertoes, hallux valgus, and plantar keratosis. Service connection was denied for palmar keratosis and neurovascular disorders.
- Denied
The Board has determined that the veteran's claimed conditions, bilateral plantar keratosis and residuals of a cold injury, are not related to service. The veteran's testimony regarding frozen feet during service was not supported by medical evidence linking these conditions to service.
- Denied
The Board found that the veteran's service-connected bilateral plantar keratosis, pes planus, and metatarsalgia is no more than severe in degree and thus does not warrant a rating in excess of 30 percent.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
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.