The Board has remanded the cases due to inadequate examinations and the need for further development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling VA examinations.
The deciding factor: The examination reports are insufficient and do not address all aspects of the Veteran's claims, particularly her theory of causation based on in-service appendectomy and subsequent adhesions.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals of a bowel perforation (also claimed as ileus), joint pains
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- February 23, 2023
- Citation
- 23011199
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 23011199.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has withdrawn claims for service connection for joint pains and muscle pain. The remaining issues of service connection for right hand, left hand, left knee, seizures/tremors, immune disorder, and nerve damage are remanded due to duty-to-assist errors.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to errors in obtaining relevant records, including service treatment records and VA hospital records. The Veteran's current back and neck disabilities are being examined by a VA examiner to determine if they are related to her military service.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for joint pains, finding that his joint pains are not related to his service and do not qualify as an undiagnosed illness or medically unexplained chronic illness (MUMCI) due to Persian Gulf War service. The Board also found no evidence of a nexus between his hereditary hemochromatosis and joint pain.
- Whole decision: Partly granted
The Board granted a higher rating of 20 percent for the right great toe fracture but denied increased ratings for lumbosacral and thoracic strain with intervertebral disc syndrome, acromioclavicular joint separation, right shoulder, and service connection for joint pains.
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.