The Board remands the claim for a left foot disability to correct a pre-decisional duty to assist error, specifically regarding an inadequate October 2024 VA examination.
The deciding factor: The October 2024 VA examination was found to be inadequate as it did not properly address the Veteran's lay statements and failed to distinguish between right and left foot pes planus.
- Claimed conditions
- pes planus, hallux valgus post-surgical, neuropathy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 18, 2025
- Citation
- A25109377
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 857 · Granted: 35% (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 A25109377.
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.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for bilateral plantar fasciitis, finding that the Veteran's pre-existing pes planus condition was aggravated by service. The effective date is August 15, 2025.
- Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral plantar fasciitis with pes planus, finding that her current condition had its onset during active military service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for SMC based on loss of use of both lower extremities is being remanded due to a failure to obtain relevant private medical records. The AOJ will consider these records when readjudicating the claim.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has found that the eligibility determination for the PCAFC was inadequate due to an insufficient medical opinion, and thus remanded for further review.
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.