The Board has decided to remand the case due to new evidence that needs to be reviewed and considered by the AOJ.
The deciding factor: New VA treatment records have been added to the claims file, but they need to be reviewed by the AOJ before a decision can be made.
- Claimed conditions
- nose fracture, traumatic deviated nasal septum
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- November 28, 2018
- Citation
- 18153736
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 18153736.
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 the veteran's claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) prior to September 30, 2021. The effective date was not granted as there was no factually ascertainable increase in his service-connected disabilities within one year of the TDIU claim.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for service connection and rating increases are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining SSA records and an opinion on the etiology of his hypertension.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a failure to properly notify the Veteran and appellant of their rights in a simultaneously contested claim, including the right to a hearing, representation, and submission of evidence.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board found that the Veteran's March 2017 substantive appeal was untimely, as it was received nearly one year after the April 2016 Statement of the Case and more than 60 days after the April 2016 SOC. The decision denied the appeal due to lack of timely submission.
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.