The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate opinions and rationale in a previous VA examination regarding the Veteran's employability.
The deciding factor: The most recent VA examination did not provide an adequate opinion or rationale, nor did it comply with August 2011 remand instructions as indicated by the Court’s decision.
- Claimed conditions
- total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, hysterectomy scar with keloid formation, chronic recurrent lower urinary tract infections, residuals of bunionectomy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- April 25, 2019
- Citation
- 19132538
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,341 · Granted: 33% (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 19132538.
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.
- Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, tension headaches with migraine components, and lumbosacral strain and spinal stenosis with degenerative disc disease, prevent her from securing or following substantially gainful employment. The Board has granted TDIU for the entire appeal period.
- Denied
The Board denied an earlier effective date for the award of service connection for a total hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and special monthly compensation (SMC) based on loss of use of a creative organ, as there is no legal basis to assign an earlier effective date.
- Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation consistent with his education and work history.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case for further development to determine if the Veteran still needs VR&E services and to assess her current employment status, education, and skills. The goal is to provide appropriate vocational rehabilitation services based on her service-connected disabilities.
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.