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

The Veteran's claim for a temporary total evaluation due to convalescence following cardiac catheterization with stent placement is denied.,Claims for effective dates prior to January 27, 2015, for service connection of PTSD and tinnitus are denied.,Claims for an increased rating for prostate cancer are denied as there was no factually ascertainable increase in disability within one year prior to the claim.,Claims for peripheral neuropathy of various extremities and residuals of malaria are remanded due to incomplete records.,Claims for a higher evaluation for tinnitus, IHD, PTSD, and prostate cancer are remanded.,Claim for TDIU is remanded.

The deciding factor: The Veteran's treatment did not necessitate at least one month of convalescence following the cardiac catheterization with stent placement. The criteria for a temporary total evaluation were not met.,There was no communication requesting service connection for PTSD or tinnitus prior to January 27, 2015, and thus an effective date prior to that date is not warranted.,The Veteran did not provide evidence of a factually ascertainable increase in disability within one year prior to the claim for increased prostate cancer. Therefore, the earliest possible effective date was granted.,Incomplete private treatment records were identified, necessitating remand to obtain additional records from Dr. E.G., Stern cardiology, and Southaven Medical Center.,The Veteran's claims for higher evaluations of tinnitus, IHD, PTSD, and prostate cancer are pending due to incomplete evidence.,The claim for TDIU is pending as the Veteran has not provided complete private treatment records.

Claimed conditions
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Tinnitus, Peripheral neuropathy of the left lower extremity, Peripheral neuropathy of the right lower extremity, Peripheral neuropathy of the left upper extremity, Peripheral neuropathy of the right upper extremity, Residuals of malaria, Ischemic heart disease (IHD), Prostate cancer
How they argued it
Direct service connection
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
October 1, 2020
Citation
20064251

Veterans Law Judge

M.E. LARKIN

Decisions by this judge: 2,084 · 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 20064251.

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.