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

The Veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 10 percent for bilateral tinnitus is denied.,The claim to reopen the service connection for spina bifida and lumbarization of S1 remains pending. The issues of whether service connection is warranted for sleep issues, collagenous colitis or an acquired psychiatric disorder are also pending.,The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for cervical spine disability, right upper extremity radiculopathy, left upper extremity radiculopathy, and special monthly compensation based on the need for aid and attendance remain pending. The earlier effective date claim is also pending.,The Veteran's tinnitus rating remains at 10 percent, as there is no legal basis to assign a higher rating. An effective date prior to March 29, 2017, for the award of service connection for tinnitus is denied.,,

The deciding factor: There is no legal basis for an increase in the rating for bilateral tinnitus as it has already been assigned the maximum schedular rating available under Diagnostic Code 6260.,The claim to reopen the service connection for spina bifida and lumbarization of S1 remains pending. The issues of whether service connection is warranted for sleep issues, collagenous colitis or an acquired psychiatric disorder are also pending.,The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for cervical spine disability, right upper extremity radiculopathy, left upper extremity radiculopathy, and special monthly compensation based on the need for aid and attendance remain pending. The earlier effective date claim is also pending.,There is no legal basis to assign a higher rating for bilateral tinnitus as it has already been assigned the maximum schedular rating available under Diagnostic Code 6260.,,

Claimed conditions
tinnitus, spina bifida and lumbarization of S1, collagenous colitis, an acquired psychiatric disorder
How they argued it
Not specified
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
May 10, 2019
Citation
19136616

Veterans Law Judge

H.M. WALKER

Decisions by this judge: 2,569 · Granted: 26% (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 19136616.

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.