The Veteran's right ankle disability resulted in moderate limitation of motion prior to August 28, 2018. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating as the degree of loss was not pronounced or striking.
The deciding factor: The degree of loss of range of motion during flare-ups was not marked and more nearly approximated moderate limitation of motion.
- Claimed conditions
- Right Ankle Fracture, Chronic Pain, Instability
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- December 22, 2020
- Citation
- 20080557
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 291 · Granted: 26% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed 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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 20080557.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran is granted a TDIU from October 12, 2016 to November 12, 2018 and from January 1, 2019 to July 22, 2019 due to service-connected disabilities preventing him from securing or following any substantially gainful occupation.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's appeal for special monthly compensation (SMC) based on housebound status or the need for regular aid and attendance was denied as there is no evidence of significant disabilities that would require such benefits.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for eligibility to enroll in the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) as he is able to independently perform activities of daily living and does not need personal care services.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran is granted a Level 2 stipend under VA's PCAFC, as he requires personal care services due to multiple health conditions and cognitive impairment, making him unable to self-sustain in the community.
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.