The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical evidence and potential missing VA treatment records. The Veteran needs a VA examination to determine if his bladder infection or residuals are related to service.
The deciding factor: Insufficient competent medical evidence for the Board to decide the claim without a VA examination.
- Claimed conditions
- Bladder infection, Residuals of bladder infection
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 19, 2023
- Citation
- 23057061
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 23057061.
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.
- Granted
The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses for emergency treatment at Central Florida Regional Hospital on February 12, 2014 are reimbursed as a result of the non-availability of VA facilities within reasonable distance and the prudent layperson standard.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a bladder infection, residuals/complications of pregnancy, and an acquired psychiatric disorder (including PTSD) as there is no evidence of ongoing disabilities or conditions related to her in-service experiences.
- Granted
The Veteran's bladder infection with blood in the urine and urinary incontinence prior to April 28, 2004 was manifested by incontinence requiring the changing of absorbent materials more than four times a day, warranting a 60 percent disability rating.
- 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.