The Board has determined that additional medical opinions and records are needed to properly adjudicate the Veteran's claims for service connection. The claims have been remanded.
The deciding factor: The claims were not fully addressed due to pre-decisional duty to assist errors, including failure to obtain VA and private treatment records relevant to the issues on appeal.
- Claimed conditions
- diabetes mellitus type II, residuals of lower back injuries, bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, right upper extremity neuropathy, left upper extremity neuropathy, loss of use of a creative organ (likely referring to blindness or other visual impairment), residuals of neck injury, right shoulder disability, left shoulder disability, right knee disability, left knee disability, right ankle disability, left ankle disability
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 31, 2026
- Citation
- A26029230
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 A26029230.
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 appeal for service connection of bilateral hearing loss and a ruptured right ear drum was dismissed due to the death of the Veteran.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's right shoulder disability and migraines/chronic headaches are remanded for additional development due to insufficient opinions on the etiology of her conditions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development, including a new VA examination to assess his bilateral knee and hip disabilities.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
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.