The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is being remanded due to the need for a new medical opinion regarding whether his postoperative sternal wound infection was classified as 'deep' and if it was reasonably foreseeable.
The deciding factor: The Court found that neither the Board nor the January 2007 VA opinion discussed medical literature of record which recognized different classes of sternal wound infections, specifically, superficial and deep wound infections. The case is remanded for a new opinion to determine if the Veteran's postoperative sternal wound infection should be classified as 'deep' and whether it was reasonably foreseeable.
- Claimed conditions
- Staphylococcus infection
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- March 13, 2018
- Citation
- 1814974
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 1814974.
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 Veteran died from a combination of underlying conditions, none of which were service-connected. The Board found that the cause of death was not caused by any service-connected disability and denied DIC benefits for cause of death as well as survivor's pension due to income exceeding maximum rates.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board found no evidence of carelessness, negligence, or error in judgment by VA that caused additional disability. The leg length discrepancy and staphylococcus infection were considered reasonably foreseeable events.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's postoperative Staphylococcus infection following coronary artery bypass grafting was not caused by VA care, but rather the result of his own negligence in failing to follow medical instructions. The Board found that there was no evidence of fault on VA's part and concluded that the additional disability did not meet the criteria for 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.
- Whole decision: Denied
The veteran's claims for benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 were denied as there was no competent medical evidence showing current disabilities resulting from the surgeries and catheterizations.
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.