The Board remands the claims for a higher rating of the Veteran's unspecified neurocognitive disorder due to a duty to assist error.
The deciding factor: A pre-decisional hearing notice was not provided, which is required under 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(d)(1).
- Claimed conditions
- unspecified neurocognitive disorder
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 25, 2025
- Citation
- A25027461
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 veteran's appeal requests for service connection and increased ratings were denied due to untimeliness, as the appeals were not filed within one year of the respective rating decisions.
- Granted
The Board granted an effective date of March 29, 2014, for the grant of a 100 percent rating for service-connected unspecified anxiety disorder with unspecified neurocognitive disorder.
- Granted
The Board granted an earlier effective date of June 14, 2019 for the grant of service connection for unspecified neurocognitive disorder.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claims for a higher rating for his unspecified neurocognitive disorder and for a TDIU prior to May 20, 2019.
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.