The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient examination and remand directives not being addressed. The Veteran's claim for service connection for appendectomy residuals will be reconsidered.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner did not address all of the Board's previous remand directives, specifically regarding the Veteran's separation examination and a private study suggesting deformity related to an appendectomy.
- Claimed conditions
- Ruptured appendix
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 17, 2022
- Citation
- 22064453
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 22064453.
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.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at Nemaha County Hospital from January 28, 2007, through February 3, 2007 was denied as the condition had stabilized and she could have been transferred to a VA facility.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the Veteran's claim for reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses is remanded due to insufficient evidence regarding whether his condition was an emergency and if VA facilities were feasibly available.
- 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.