The Veteran's bilateral foot pain is remanded due to a duty-to-assist error, and the claims are now subject to further examination and consideration on all possible theories of entitlement.
The deciding factor: The decision was based on an inadequate opinion regarding secondary service connection and a failure to consider direct service connection. The Board found that a new VA examination is needed to address all theories of entitlement.
- Claimed conditions
- right foot plantar fasciitis with calcaneal spurs, left foot plantar fasciitis with calcaneal spurs
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 23, 2023
- Citation
- A23029165
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 A23029165.
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.
- Dismissed
The Board has dismissed all issues on appeal due to the appellant's authorized representative withdrawing their claims.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's appeal of the ratings assigned for his bilateral plantar fasciitis was remanded, and a new examination is needed to assess the functional impairment resulting from his bilateral plantar fasciitis.,TDIU remains on appeal as an element of the previously perfected increased rating claim despite the award of TDIU for a portion of the appeal period.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's appeal is remanded for several reasons, including the need to address the effective date of a 30 percent rating for his service-connected status post cholecystectomy and the need for new examinations to assess the severity of his bilateral foot disabilities. The issues of entitlement to increased ratings and TDIU are also being remanded.
- 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.
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.