The Board has remanded the case due to a failure to address VA treatment records from 1994-2005, specifically those related to Dr. L. M. J.'s March 2, 1995 X-ray. The AOJ is required to obtain these records and determine if they are new and material to the service connection and increased rating issues.
The deciding factor: The Board found that VA did not adequately address its duty to assist in obtaining relevant VA treatment records from 1994-2005, particularly those related to Dr. L. M. J.'s March 2, 1995 X-ray.
- Claimed conditions
- Total Disability Based on Individual Unemployability (TDIU)
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 2, 2026
- Citation
- A26018384
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 A26018384.
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.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for a total disability based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is denied because the increase in his service-connected disabilities occurred more than one year prior to the February 8, 2018 application.
- Denied
The Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral foot swelling, PTSD, diabetes mellitus, and lower extremity peripheral neuropathy were denied. The Veteran was granted a TDIU.
- 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.
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.