The Board has determined that the VA examinations are inadequate and remands both issues for further development, including obtaining a medical opinion on the nature of the Veteran's DVT and whether it was aggravated by his service-connected right knee strain.
The deciding factor: The examination did not address the aggravation theory of secondary service connection or clarify the developmental nature of Factor V Leiden.
- Claimed conditions
- deep vein thrombosis (DVT), right leg, bilateral pulmonary embolism
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- August 3, 2022
- Citation
- 22044049
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 22044049.
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 service connection due to insufficient VA medical opinions and procedural errors. The Veteran is seeking service connection for bilateral pulmonary embolism, left ankle condition, and right ankle condition, all of which are related to his active duty service.
- Denied
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral pulmonary embolism and an eye disability, including chronic open angle glaucoma, nodular scleritis, blepharitis, and dry eye syndrome. The evidence does not support a finding that these conditions began during service or are related to in-service events.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for reimbursement of medical expenses incurred for a bilateral pulmonary embolism treatment at Bronson Methodist Hospital is being remanded due to the VA not considering it under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. § 1728 and 38 C.F.R. §§ 17.120-32.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the claims for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and bilateral pulmonary embolism, as they are inextricably intertwined. The right leg DVT is being remanded due to an inadequate July 2021 VA opinion on aggravation, and the claim for bilateral pulmonary embolism must be remanded also because of this issue.
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.