The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for increased evaluations of his right knee chondromalacia and aorta residuals due to inadequate examination reports, need for retrospective opinions, and new evidence received since the last SSOC.
The deciding factor: The VA examinations were insufficient, there is uncertainty about the severity prior to March 10, 2020, and additional evidence has been added to the claims file.
- Claimed conditions
- chondromalacia of the right knee, residuals of a ruptured aorta
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- January 2, 2024
- Citation
- 24000021
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 868 · Granted: 42% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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 24000021.
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: Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities have caused him to need regular aid and attendance, leading to a grant of SMC based on the need for aid and attendance. The issue of entitlement to SMC at the housebound rate is dismissed as moot.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities, finding that his combined schedular ratings did not meet the threshold requirement for consideration of TDIU. The case was remanded multiple times and ultimately denied again.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for service connection are being remanded due to the lack of a VA examination and opinion regarding his claimed conditions. The Board finds that additional development is necessary to determine if there is a link between the Veteran's current disabilities and his active service.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Board's September 4, 2025 decision was vacated due to a failure to address clear and unmistakable error arguments, depriving the Veteran of due process.
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.