The Board denied an initial disability rating in excess of 30 percent for the Veteran's bilateral pes planus and left foot plantar fasciitis, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating. The claims for service connection for left and right ankle disabilities were remanded for further development.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher disability rating due to the lack of objective evidence of marked deformity or severe symptoms associated with the Veteran's foot conditions, as required by the applicable diagnostic codes.
- Claimed conditions
- Bilateral pes planus, Left ankle disability, Left foot plantar fasciitis, Right ankle disability
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 30%
- Decision date
- December 8, 2025
- Citation
- A25105369
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 703 · Granted: 47% (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 A25105369.
What this means for you
A partial grant means some issues were granted while others were denied or remanded — common in multi-issue claims. Look at which issues went which way, and how each was argued.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date of January 10, 1997, for a 10% disability rating for his right ankle disability is denied as there was no CUE in the previous decisions.
- Granted
The Board has granted the appellant's claim for service connection for left ankle disability residuals, finding that his current condition is due to an in-service injury and granting the benefit of the doubt.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for a higher level of SMC was denied as the Board found that he is already in receipt of SMC at the (l) rate based on need for regular aid and attendance due to service-connected disabilities, including coronary artery disease with congestive heart failure. A second award of SMC at the (l) rate based on need for regular aid and attendance was not warranted.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's right ankle disability is related to his service. The VA examiner must provide an opinion on this matter.
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.