Veterans’ RightsAn independent resource for veterans
← All decisions
Remanded (sent back)

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for tinnitus is denied as the current rating of 10% already reflects the maximum schedular rating available.,The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is denied as her hearing acuity does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under the applicable rating schedule.,The claims for service connection for right knee, left knee, low back, neck, right-hand, and left-hand disabilities are remanded due to new relevant evidence having been received since their last adjudication.,The claim for service connection for stress incontinence is remanded as new relevant evidence has been received since its last adjudication.,The claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability is remanded as new relevant evidence has been received since its last adjudication.

The deciding factor: Tinnitus is already rated at the maximum schedular rating of 10% under Diagnostic Code (DC) 6260.,The Veteran's hearing acuity does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating as her hearing loss is currently rated noncompensably under DC 6100.,New relevant evidence has been received since the last adjudication of these claims, warranting reconsideration on their merits.,New relevant evidence has been received since the last adjudication of this claim, warranting reconsideration on its merits.,New relevant evidence has been received since the last adjudication of this claim, warranting reconsideration on its merits.

Claimed conditions
tinnitus, bilateral hearing loss, right knee disability, left knee disability, low back disability, neck disability, right-hand disability, left-hand disability, stress incontinence, acquired psychiatric disability
How they argued it
Not specified
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
October 15, 2024
Citation
A24065686

Veterans Law Judge

Nathaniel J. Doan

Decisions by this judge: 1,429 · Granted: 29% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted 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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation A24065686.

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.

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.