The Board has found that there is not substantial compliance with the February 2023 remand directives and has decided to remand the case for additional development, including obtaining updated VA and private treatment records and affording the Veteran an additional VA examination.
The deciding factor: The decision was remanded due to lack of substantial compliance with previous remand directives.
- Claimed conditions
- chronic upper respiratory infections (URIs), benign pulmonary nodules
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- April 23, 2024
- Citation
- 24017212
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 24017212.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the claim for a recurrent pulmonary disability to ensure that there is a complete record upon which to decide the claim, including obtaining a thorough and contemporaneous medical examination.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's benign pulmonary nodules have not been rated appropriately, and the Board has ordered a remand to ensure that his disability is evaluated accurately based on current medical evidence.
- Denied
The Board found that the Veteran's respiratory conditions, including asthma and obstructive sleep apnea, were not incurred in service or due to exposure to Agent Orange or asbestos. The benign pulmonary nodules were also unrelated to service.
- 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.