The Veteran's right knee disability is being remanded due to the need for clarification on whether his service treatment records mistakenly labeled his injury as a left knee injury.
The deciding factor: The opinion was based on the assumption that there were no right knee injuries in service, and this needs to be reconsidered given the Veteran's assertion of mislabeling.
- Claimed conditions
- Right leg disability
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 17, 2018
- Citation
- 18135803
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 18135803.
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 right foot condition, including pain and functional limitation, is related to service. The Veteran's right leg disability did not have an onset in service or manifest within a year of service, nor is it otherwise related to service or a service-connected disability. The Veteran's left leg disability also did not have an onset in service or manifest within a year of service, nor is it otherwise related to service or a service-connected disability.
- Denied
The Veteran's appeals for increased ratings for his right leg and right ankle disabilities, as well as a compensable rating for his left knee scar, were denied. The Board found that the Veteran failed to cooperate with scheduled VA examinations without providing good cause.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the appellant's claims for service connection are remanded due to a failure to provide adequate VA examinations and opinions, particularly regarding exposure to burn pits and other toxins (BPOTs) during his service in the Persian Gulf.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the VHA decision denying PCAFC benefits was inadequate due to insufficient discussion of relevant medical evidence and remanded for further action.
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.