The Board has remanded the cases for additional development, including a VA gynecological examination by a physician to assess the severity of the Veteran's residuals of her cesarean section.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the previous examinations were not conducted by physicians as requested and thus required further evaluation.
- Claimed conditions
- residual scar, adhesions, urinary frequency, urinary stress incontinence, female sexual arousal disorder
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 11, 2020
- Citation
- 20059796
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 20059796.
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.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for adhesions as secondary to irritable bowel syndrome, finding that there was no nexus between the claimed condition and service or a service-connected disability.
- Denied
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for irritable bowel syndrome, sleep apnea, post-traumatic stress disorder, and urinary frequency as there is no competent evidence linking these conditions to his military service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has denied service connection for urinary frequency, as secondary to hypertension and non-service-connected diabetes mellitus type II. The other claims are remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for migraines and hysterectomy due to inadequate medical opinions in the original decision. A new VA examination is needed to address whether the Veteran's migraines are related to her service, and a new addendum opinion is needed to determine if her preexisting cyst was aggravated by active duty.
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.