The Board denied earlier effective dates for service connection and initial ratings, as well as special monthly compensation.
The deciding factor: The evidence did not support an earlier effective date or a higher rating due to the timing of claims and the regulations governing effective dates and ratings.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral macula edema with retina infiltrates, bilateral flat feet to include plantar fasciitis, bilateral foot disorders
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 30, 2025
- Citation
- A25094253
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,960 · Granted: 36% (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 A25094253.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral foot disorders, including plantar fasciitis, as secondary to his service-connected PTSD is being remanded due to the lack of a thorough opinion addressing the potential intermediate step of obesity/weight gain in relation to his PTSD and foot disorders.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's bilateral foot disorders, including pes planus and metatarsalgia, are being remanded for further examination to determine if they are caused or aggravated by her service-connected left knee disorder.
- Dismissed
The Board has dismissed all appeals for rating increases and service connection due to the Veteran's death.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of consideration of the Veteran's lay testimony regarding his continued symptoms, and for obtaining an adequate medical opinion.
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.