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

The Veteran has withdrawn his increased rating claims for coronary artery disease (CAD) and diabetes mellitus type II.,The Veteran has withdrawn his earlier effective date claim for tinnitus. The AOJ will issue a SOC regarding the service connection claims for arthritis.,The Veteran's loss of teeth is remanded due to lack of an adequate VA examination, as well as the need for clarification on carcinogen exposure and further development of the record.,PTSD symptoms are remanded for a new VA examination to determine their current severity and impact on employment.,TDIU claim is remanded as it is inextricably intertwined with other claims.

The deciding factor: The Veteran has withdrawn his increased rating claims for CAD and diabetes mellitus type II, and earlier effective date claim for tinnitus. The remaining issues are related to service connection for loss of teeth, arthritis, TDIU, and PTSD.,PTSD symptoms have worsened since the last VA examination in April 2013, necessitating a new examination to assess current severity and impact on employment.,The Veteran's loss of teeth is remanded due to lack of an adequate VA examination and need for clarification on carcinogen exposure. The arthritis claims are also remanded as they have not been addressed by the AOJ in a SOC.,TDIU claim is remanded as it is inextricably intertwined with other claims, including PTSD and service connection for loss of teeth and arthritis.

Claimed conditions
Coronary artery disease (CAD), Diabetes mellitus type II, Tinnitus, Arthritis (bilateral shoulder, bilateral hand, back, iliac/pelvic area and right knee)
How they argued it
Not specified
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
November 19, 2019
Citation
19186978

Veterans Law Judge

S. HENEKS

Decisions by this judge: 1,726 · 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 19186978.

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.