The Board remands the claims for further development, including reevaluation of the evidence under the criteria which existed prior to the new DC 5269 and issuance of a decision that fully explains the changes in the Veteran's symptoms/condition.
The deciding factor: The August 2024 VA examination report did not note a metatarsalgia diagnosis, while the December 2024 VA foot condition examination noted metatarsalgia. The reduction is unclear as the previous correspondence stated that the reduction was based on the Veteran not having metatarsalgia.
- Claimed conditions
- pes planus with plantar fasciitis and metatarsalgia
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 21, 2025
- Citation
- A25090618
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,135 · Granted: 33% (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 A25090618.
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.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including major depressive disorder with alcohol use disorder and sleep apnea, have resulted in a combined rating of 100 percent. He is already receiving special monthly compensation at the housebound rate due to his service-connected disabilities. Therefore, the issue of entitlement to a TDIU is moot.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
- Denied
The Veteran's service-connected musculoligamentous strain, right knee, is currently rated at 10 percent and the Board finds that a higher rating is not warranted.
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.