The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical evidence and a need for further examination.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner's opinion was incomplete, lacking a reasoned analysis of the medical evidence of record.
- Claimed conditions
- nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 4, 2019
- Citation
- 19191175
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 19191175.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's service connection claim for nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy, claimed as holes in the back of his eyes, is being remanded due to insufficient evidence regarding the etiology of these conditions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for service connection and increased ratings are being remanded due to the need for additional examinations and opinions. The TDIU claim is also being remanded.
- Denied
The Veteran's diabetes mellitus, type II, is rated at 20 percent and the Board finds that it does not warrant a higher rating as his condition does not require regulation of activities or hospitalization for complications.
- Denied
The veteran's claims for higher initial disability ratings for his service-connected conditions were denied. His diabetes mellitus is currently evaluated as 40 percent disabling, peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities are noncompensable from April 14, 2003 to January 20, 2006, erectile dysfunction and diabetic retinopathy each receive a noncompensable evaluation.
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.