The appeal was dismissed due to the improper docketing in the modernized review system under the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA).
The deciding factor: A supplemental claim cannot be filed in connection with a denial of a request to revise a final decision based on clear and unmistakable error (CUE), as CUE must be based upon the facts and law that existed at the time of the prior decision, not new and relevant evidence.
- Claimed conditions
- flat foot (pes planus)
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- March 25, 2025
- Citation
- A25027728
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,081 · Granted: 38% (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 A25027728.
What this means for you
A dismissal means the Board did not decide the issue on its merits — usually because it was withdrawn or had become moot. It says more about procedure than about whether a claim like this can win.
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: Denied
The Board has denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral foot disability, including plantar fasciitis and flat foot (pes planus), finding no evidence of a causal link to his active military service.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal was withdrawn and dismissed by the Veteran's representative prior to the requested hearing, as the Veteran was satisfied with his current ratings.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of an adequate medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's right foot disorder. The claim will be reconsidered with the addition of a new VA examination.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that there was not substantial compliance with the September 2021 remand directives and finds another remand is necessary to obtain an adequate VA opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral foot disability.
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.