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

The Veteran's appeal for earlier effective dates for service connection and increased ratings is dismissed or denied.,The Veteran's claim of an earlier effective date for the award of service connection for bilateral cataracts is denied.,The Veteran's claims of earlier effective dates for the awards of service connection for left and right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy are denied.,Increased ratings for left and right upper and lower extremity peripheral neuropathy are remanded.

The deciding factor: There was no evidence that service connection for right eye diabetic retinopathy was severed, and the appeal is moot as there is no remaining justiciable case or controversy with respect to this issue.,The Veteran did not file a formal or informal claim prior to October 3, 2016, for service connection for cataracts. The grant of service connection is the date of receipt of the claim or the date entitlement arose, whichever is later.,There was no evidence that service connection for right and left upper and lower extremity peripheral neuropathy was ever severed before July 6, 2009, and the claims are denied as there is no earlier formal or informal claim for these conditions prior to this date.,The Veteran's claims of entitlement to increased ratings for bilateral upper and lower extremity peripheral neuropathy were remanded due to insufficient evidence.

Claimed conditions
right diabetic retinopathy, bilateral cataracts, left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, left upper extremity peripheral neuropathy, right upper extremity peripheral neuropathy
How they argued it
Direct service connection
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
December 30, 2020
Citation
20081709

Veterans Law Judge

L. CHU

Decisions by this judge: 2,451 · Granted: 22% (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 20081709.

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.