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

The Veteran's tinnitus is currently rated at 10 percent, and the Board has determined that a higher rating is not warranted on an extraschedular basis.,For the period from March 7, 2012, to November 30, 2017, his acquired psychiatric disability was evaluated as 50 percent disabling. The Board found that this level of impairment did not meet or exceed the criteria for a higher rating (such as 70% or 100%) and thus denied an increased evaluation.,The Veteran's arthritis conditions were remanded due to insufficient evidence on whether they are service-connected.,Service connection was granted for headaches secondary to tinnitus.,Other claims, including those related to sleep disability, hypertension, skin condition, diabetes mellitus, special monthly compensation, and TDIU, were also remanded.

The deciding factor: The Veteran's tinnitus does not present an exceptional case where the schedular evaluation is inadequate. The symptoms described are consistent with the criteria for a 10 percent rating.,For the period from March 7, 2012, to November 30, 2017, the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disability did not meet or exceed the criteria for a higher rating (such as 70% or 100%).,The arthritis conditions were remanded due to insufficient evidence on whether they are service-connected.,Service connection was granted for headaches secondary to tinnitus because the Veteran's headache symptoms are proximately due to his service-connected tinnitus.,Other claims, including those related to sleep disability, hypertension, skin condition, diabetes mellitus, special monthly compensation, and TDIU, were remanded as insufficient evidence on whether they meet the criteria for service connection.

Claimed conditions
tinnitus, acquired psychiatric disability (likely referring to PTSD or another anxiety/depression-related condition), arthritis in left hand, right hand, left hip, right hip, left knee, and right knee, a sleep disability, hypertension, skin disability (referred to as a skin disability but not further specified), diabetes mellitus
How they argued it
Not specified
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
April 17, 2019
Citation
19129908

Veterans Law Judge

Matthew Tenner

Decisions by this judge: 439 · Granted: 19% (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 19129908.

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.