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

The Board denied service connection for type II diabetes mellitus (DMT2) and related secondary conditions. The case was remanded for additional development regarding a breathing condition.,Service connection for anatomical loss of the bilateral lower extremities and peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper extremities, both claimed as secondary to DMT2, were denied. The case was also remanded for an addendum VA medical opinion on a breathing condition.,The Board denied service connection for stroke, which was claimed as secondary to DMT2. The case was also remanded for additional development regarding a breathing condition.,Service connection for type II diabetes mellitus (DMT2) and related secondary conditions were denied. Service connection for a breathing condition, to include asbestosis, was remanded.

The deciding factor: The evidence did not establish that DMT2 began during service or was caused by any in-service event.,The evidence did not establish that anatomical loss of the bilateral lower extremities and peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper extremities were caused or aggravated by a service-connected disability.,The evidence did not establish that stroke was caused or aggravated by a service-connected disability.,There is conflicting evidence regarding whether asbestosis, which may be related to exposure during service, should be diagnosed. The case was remanded for an addendum VA medical opinion.

Claimed conditions
type II diabetes mellitus (DMT2), anatomical loss of the bilateral lower extremities, peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper extremities, stroke
How they argued it
Not specified
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
June 18, 2020
Citation
20041785

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 20041785.

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.