The case is being remanded because the full report of the Veteran's January 2004 gallbladder surgery was not uploaded to the digital claims file, and there are concerns about the way the file was reviewed. The AOJ must ensure that the entire report is added to the digital file and send the claims file for a comprehensive review by a physician.
The deciding factor: The case requires additional evidence due to incomplete documentation of the Veteran's January 2004 gallbladder surgery and concerns about the adequacy of the medical review conducted on the claims file.
- Claimed conditions
- pancreatitis, cholecystectomy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- March 13, 2019
- Citation
- 19118313
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,960 · Granted: 36% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed 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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 19118313.
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 service connection for asthma, COPD, pancreatitis, stroke, and left arm weakness (claimed as secondary to stroke) based on the presumption of exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune. The evidence did not support a finding that these conditions were related to service or due to in-service exposure.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Veteran's appeals were withdrawn, and his claims for increased ratings and service connection were dismissed. The Board found no evidence of ankylosis or other disabling conditions that would warrant higher ratings.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's GERD is rated at a 30 percent rating, but no higher. The claim for TDIU was raised and must be adjudicated again.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has denied service connection for urinary frequency, as secondary to hypertension and non-service-connected diabetes mellitus type II. The other claims are remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions.
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.