The Board remanded the claim for service connection of pulmonary embolism, including as secondary to hypertension. The decision was made because the medical opinions did not adequately address whether the condition was aggravated by hypertension or caused by toxic exposure.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the medical opinions lacked sufficient rationale regarding the aggravation and causation of the pulmonary embolism.
- Claimed conditions
- pulmonary embolism
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- January 21, 2025
- Citation
- A25005137
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 699 · Granted: 12% (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 A25005137.
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 pulmonary embolism as secondary to the Veteran's service-connected status post spigelian herniorrhaphy, finding that the surgery increased her risk of developing a pulmonary embolism.
- Granted
The Veteran's pulmonary disability is directly related to his active service, and the Board has granted service connection for this condition.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to a duty-to-assist error regarding the Veteran's exposure to asbestos and Agent Orange during service. The claims are now pending for further development.
- Denied
The Veteran's pulmonary embolism and its residuals were not caused by VA carelessness, negligence, or similar fault. The Board found no additional disability due to VA fault.
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.