The Board has decided to remand the case due to a need for further development and clarification of the medical opinion provided, as it does not fully address whether the Veteran's claimed disability is related to VA treatment.
The deciding factor: Further development is necessary to determine if the Veteran's partial loss of the left lung would have been avoided with earlier proper diagnosis and treatment for lung cancer.
- Claimed conditions
- partial loss of the left lung
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- May 11, 2021
- Citation
- 21028618
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 21028618.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to an inadequate opinion from a non-VA physician regarding whether partial loss of the left lung could have been avoided if VA providers had biopsied the Veteran's left lung sooner. The decision is pending further review and a new opinion.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has ordered a new medical opinion to determine if the Veteran's partial loss of the left lung could have been avoided with earlier biopsies, and this matter is being remanded for that purpose.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has ordered a new medical opinion to determine if the Veteran's partial loss of the left lung could have been avoided with earlier biopsies, and is remanding the case for this purpose.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
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.