The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate statement of reasons and bases, failure to comply with VA's duty to assist, and need for updated rating criteria application.
The deciding factor: The decision was not supported by adequate rationale and failed to address the Veteran's arguments regarding the use of subjective terms in Diagnostic Code 5271. Additionally, it did not provide an adequate medical examination as required by Correia v. McDonald (2016).
- Claimed conditions
- Right ankle disability
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 17, 2021
- Citation
- A21020220
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 A21020220.
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 Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date of January 10, 1997, for a 10% disability rating for his right ankle disability is denied as there was no CUE in the previous decisions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's right ankle disability is related to his service. The VA examiner must provide an opinion on this matter.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has dismissed the appeals to reduce disability ratings for bilateral hearing loss and right ankle disabilities. The case is REMANDED for a VA examination regarding the service connection claim for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD.
- Granted
The Veteran's right ankle disability is granted a 20 percent rating, but no higher. The claim for a compensable rating for Pseudofolliculitis barbae (PFB) is denied.
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.