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

The Veteran's headaches are not characterized by very frequent completely prostrating attacks productive of severe economic inadaptability, and the claim for a rating in excess of 30 percent is denied.,Claims for earlier effective dates for increased ratings for headaches and bilateral upper extremity peripheral neuropathy were received on March 13, 2013. The evidence does not show an increase in these disabilities within one year prior to this date, so the earliest allowable date is March 13, 2013.,The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for bilateral upper and lower extremity peripheral neuropathy are remanded as there are no treatment records related to his counseling for PTSD. The claim for TDIU is also remanded due to its inextricability with the other claims.

The deciding factor: The evidence does not demonstrate very frequent completely prostrating and prolonged attacks of headache pain that are productive of severe economic inadaptability.,There is no medical evidence relating to the Veteran’s disabilities within one year prior to his March 13, 2013 application for increased ratings. The earliest allowable date under the law is March 13, 2013.,The claims are remanded as there are no treatment records related to the Veteran's counseling for PTSD and the claim for TDIU is inextricably intertwined with the other claims.

Claimed conditions
Headaches, Peripheral neuropathy of the left upper extremity, Peripheral neuropathy of the right upper extremity, Peripheral neuropathy of the right lower extremity, Peripheral neuropathy of the left lower extremity, Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
How they argued it
Direct service connection
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
January 29, 2019
Citation
19107025

Veterans Law Judge

A. S. CARACCIOLO

Decisions by this judge: 1,614 · Granted: 35% (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 19107025.

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.