The Board has remanded the case for a new opinion regarding whether the Veteran's bilateral pes planus was aggravated by service and if any other current foot disabilities originated during or are etiologically related to his active duty service.
The deciding factor: The decision is based on the need for a new medical opinion addressing the Veteran's lay contentions about in-service symptoms and post-service self-treatment of his foot conditions.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral pes planus, bilateral hallux valgus (bunions), gout, degenerative joint disease, fourth toe hammertoes, plantar fasciitis, pronation syndrome, hallux rigidus/valgus
- How they argued it
- Aggravation of a pre-existing condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- September 13, 2018
- Citation
- 18134372
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 18134372.
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 Board has remanded the Veteran's gout claim for additional development, including obtaining an adequate VA examination and ensuring all relevant records are obtained. The TDIU claim is also being remanded.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has found that the Veteran meets the basic medical eligibility criteria for PCAFC benefits due to his need for personal care services based on symptoms or residuals of neurological or other impairment or injury. However, further clinical evaluation is needed to determine if participation in the program is in the Veteran's best interest.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's claim for an evaluation in excess of 40 percent for his lumbar spine disability has been denied. The Board found that the evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating, as there was no unfavorable ankylosis or incapacitating episodes of IVDS.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Appellant's requests for earlier effective dates for his service connection for bilateral pes planus and gynecomastia scar residuals, finding that the earliest possible effective dates are the dates of receipt of the claims.
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.