The Board has remanded the case due to concerns about the expertise of the VA examiner who provided a medical opinion related to the Veteran's service connection claim for periodontal disease and loss of teeth. The Veteran and his representative have been notified that they need to provide additional information.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner had instances of public discipline in Alabama, which may affect their expertise on the matter at hand.
- Claimed conditions
- periodontal disease, loss of teeth
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- May 12, 2021
- Citation
- 21028846
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 21028846.
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: Dismissed
The Veteran withdrew his appeal for compensation under 38 USC § 1151 for loss of teeth, and the appeal is dismissed.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's periodontal disease is service-connected for treatment purposes only, given his current 100% schedular evaluation.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including prostate cancer, CAD, and bilateral lower extremity nerve damage, have rendered him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation. The Board has granted the TDIU.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's initial claim for an increased rating for loss of teeth was denied as her disability did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under Diagnostic Code 9913.,The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for telogen effluvium (claimed as hair loss) was also denied, as there is no evidence that she has lost all body hair.
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.