The Board has determined that the VA examinations provided were not responsive to the February 2018 remand directives and thus, the claims for service connection are being remanded for further development.
The deciding factor: The prior remand directives required opinions regarding the Veteran’s other heart conditions as well, including whether his other heart conditions were as likely as not related to his military service, or aggravated by his active duty service. The opinion provided was not responsive to these requirements.
- Claimed conditions
- heart disorder, rheumatic heart disease with mitral valvulitis and insufficiency, psychiatric disorder
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 30, 2020
- Citation
- 20008124
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 961 · Granted: 20% (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 20008124.
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 Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection due to errors in obtaining relevant medical records and authorization for private treatment providers. The issues include heart disorder, OSA, sinusitis, lumbar spine disorder, and right knee disorder all related to Agent Orange exposure.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a heart disorder, to include ischemic heart disease (IHD), finding that there was not sufficient evidence to establish a link between his current condition and his military service. The Board noted that the Veteran did not have active military service from January 9, 1962, to July 31, 1980, and that he was not exposed to herbicide agents during his military service.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including left hip disorder, bilateral ankle disorder, bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy, heart disorder, insomnia, sexual arousal disorder, gynecological disorder, rheumatoid arthritis, and HTN. The evidence did not support a current diagnosis of these conditions or their relationship to military service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claims for service connection for a left knee disorder and a heart disorder due to insufficient examination opinions and failure to consider potential exposure to diesel fumes during service.
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.