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

The Veteran's service connection claims for various disabilities, including residuals of clival meningioma and related conditions, are being remanded due to her failure to report for a VA examination.

The deciding factor: The Veteran failed to appear for scheduled VA examinations multiple times, showing good cause for non-appearance in some cases.

Claimed conditions
residuals of clival meningioma, left heel disability (claimed as boogie heel), left elbow pain, bilateral eye disability (to include right eye keratitis, right eye corneal abrasion, right eye epiphora, conjunctivitis, astigmatism, and refractive error), mastoidectomy, fevers, hypokalemia, scars, post meningiotomy, residuals of tracheotomy, and residual cerebrospinal fluid leak to lower back region, atalectasis, respiratory disability (to include pleural effusion, pneumocephalus, sinusitis, and upper respiratory infection), disability manifested by an abnormal echocardiogram (ECG), carotid duplex study, and unspecified percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube condition, cricopharingeal muscle hypertrophy (claimed as abnormal swallow and dysphagia), nausea, vomiting, and a nosebleed, urinary tract infection, disability manifested by groin pain, pelvic pain, and right lower extremity pain, skin disability (claimed as dry and itching skin), disability manifested by cysts on the lower back (claimed as bumps on the lower back), hyperthyroidism, transient cerebral ischemic attack (claimed transient ischemic attack related to birth control pills), headaches, right fifth cranial nerve (CN-V) disorder, right ninth cranial nerve (CN-IX) disorder, dental disability (to include gingivitis)
How they argued it
Direct service connection
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
March 28, 2019
Citation
19123372

Veterans Law Judge

Eric S. Leboff

Decisions by this judge: 2,500 · Granted: 29% (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 19123372.

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.