The Board has remanded the cases for an additional VA examination to address the Veteran's bilateral plantar fasciitis with pes planus prior to April 14, 2012.
The deciding factor: The need for a retrospective opinion based on information elicited from the Veteran himself is required by the Court's previous remands and guidance in Sharp v. Shulkin.
- Claimed conditions
- left plantar fasciitis with pes planus, right plantar fasciitis with pes planus
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 25, 2021
- Citation
- 21065074
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 21065074.
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 remanded the Veteran's claims for increased ratings for bilateral plantar fasciitis with pes planus due to inadequate examination and failure to address lay reports of flare-ups.
- Remanded (sent back)
The veteran is seeking an earlier effective date for his TDIU benefit, which was granted in April 2004. The Board finds that additional development is needed to determine the earliest date at which he became unemployable due to service-connected disabilities.
- 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.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
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.