The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of consideration of the Veteran's testimony and April 2017 hearing during the evaluation for TDIU. The case is now being returned to the Board for further development.
The deciding factor: The decision was remanded because the VA examiner did not consider the Veteran’s testimony from his April 2017 hearing, which included information about his difficulties in communicating with women and his ability to perform his part-time job as a tutor.
- Claimed conditions
- PTSD with major depressive disorder, migraines, lumbar strain, temporomandibular joint disorder with bruxism, right hip strain, erectile dysfunction
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 3, 2019
- Citation
- 19100577
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,170 · Granted: 38% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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 19100577.
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 claim for service connection for migraines was reopened due to new evidence. Service connection is granted for painful scars, but the rating assigned remains at 10 percent. The claims for fibromyalgia and bilateral shoulder disability are denied.
- Granted
The Board has determined that the Veteran's headaches are at least as likely as not caused by his service-connected traumatic brain injury, and thus grants service connection for this condition.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus, prostate cancer, visual impairment, hypertension, and erectile dysfunction due to lack of exposure to herbicide agents during service. The Veteran's claims were not granted.
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.