The Board has decided to remand the case due to inadequate opinions and further development is needed.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the previously obtained opinions were insufficient and required additional clinical evaluation and opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's leg conditions.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral leg injury, tibial bowing
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- November 13, 2019
- Citation
- 19185673
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,548 · Granted: 31% (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 19185673.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral leg injury is being remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions and information.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims due to incomplete records and for additional medical opinions.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including sickle cell anemia, ulcers, cold injury residuals of the feet, bilateral leg injuries, back disability, and loss of teeth. The decision found that no new and material evidence had been received to reopen the claim for sickle cell anemia, and that there was insufficient evidence to establish service connection for the other conditions.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board has determined that there is no competent evidence linking any of the claimed conditions to service, including an in-service automobile accident. Therefore, service connection for a back disability, right hip disability, bilateral leg injury as secondary to a back disability, and right kidney disability are denied.
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.