The Board is unable to determine which specific claim is currently before it due to missing documents. The case will be remanded for further development of the claims file.
The deciding factor: Missing relevant documents prevent a clear determination of the current appeal's issues and evidence.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals of right leg injury
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- July 12, 2018
- Citation
- 18118041
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 18118041.
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: Denied
The Board denied service connection for the Veteran's residuals of right leg injury, finding that there is no evidence to support a link between his current pain and an in-service motorcycle accident or other incident.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's request to reopen a claim for service connection for tinnitus was denied. Service connection for coronary artery disease (CAD) is also denied, as the evidence does not establish that it is related to his military service or herbicide exposure. The claims of service connection for bilateral shoulder disability and residuals of bilateral leg injury are remanded for further examination. The rating for low back disability and radiculopathy of both lower extremities are also remanded.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the Veteran's bilateral knee injury. The Veteran is seeking service connection for this condition, which may be related to an in-service injury in 1989.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's claim for service connection for tinnitus was denied as the evidence did not show that his current diagnosis of tinnitus began during service or is otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease.,The Veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 10 percent for bronchial asthma was denied because his PFT findings showed no worse than FEV-1 score of 88 percent predicted and FEV-1/FVC score of 82 percent, which did not meet the criteria for a higher rating.,The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for residuals of right leg injury was denied as the scar measurement (10 cm x 0.5 cm) did not meet the criteria under any applicable diagnostic codes.
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.