The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient examination evidence and outstanding VA treatment records. The Veteran's claim for service connection for a central auditory processing disorder is being reviewed again.
The deciding factor: The medical opinion provided on previous examinations did not address the Veteran’s contentions regarding his exposure to noise during service and its impact on his central auditory system.
- Claimed conditions
- central auditory processing disorder, bilateral ear disability
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- April 29, 2021
- Citation
- 21025962
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 21025962.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
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's tinnitus is presumed to have been incurred in service, and the appeal for central auditory processing disorder is denied.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has found multiple pre-decisional duty to assist errors and remanded the case for further action, including obtaining private treatment records from Dr. M.S.S., scheduling a VA examination, and addressing inconsistencies in previous opinions.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral ear disability, excluding skin-related manifestations of lupus, finding no current disability and thus not meeting one of the three requirements for service connection.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The appeal for service connection for peritoneal adhesions following injury or surgery of the stomach and bilateral ear disability was withdrawn by the Veteran.
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.