The Veteran's claim for service connection for foot conditions (hammer toes, hallux valgus, and loss of longitudinal arch), to include as secondary to bilateral foot calluses, has been reopened. The Board finds that the evidence received since the June 2003 rating decision is new and material, thus reopening the claim. However, the Veteran's service connection for foot conditions remains remanded due to insufficient evidence linking her current foot conditions to her service-connected bilateral foot calluses.
The deciding factor: The evidence submitted by the Veteran does not provide sufficient information to establish a plausible link between her current foot conditions and her service-connected bilateral foot calluses, thus requiring further examination and evaluation.
- Claimed conditions
- hammer toes, hallux valgus, loss of longitudinal arch
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 15, 2019
- Citation
- 19103449
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the claim for a left foot condition to satisfy a statutory duty related to the Veteran's service-connected knee conditions.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for pes planus with hallux valgus, metatarsalgia, and hammer toes as the evidence did not support a finding that these conditions were incurred or aggravated during active service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the case to obtain a more thorough medical opinion addressing whether the Veteran's left foot/toe disorders are related to her service or secondary to her service-connected left knee disability.
- Dismissed
The appeal was dismissed because the Veteran did not timely file a Board Appeal request and no good cause was shown for the late filing.
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.