Veterans’ RightsAn independent resource for veterans
← All decisions
Remanded (sent back)

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a lack of clarity in Dr. Smernoff's opinion regarding his August 2018 letter, which is based on studies not submitted with the letter.

The deciding factor: The Board found that the August 2018 private medical opinion was based on studies not identified or submitted with the letter and thus lacked sufficient support to be considered adequate.

Claimed conditions
Parkinson's disease
How they argued it
Direct service connection
Exposure basis
Burn pits / airborne hazards
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
July 12, 2019
Citation
A19000627

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 A19000627.

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.

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.