⚡ Live demo — anonymized sample case with real analysis output. Upload your own documents to analyze your actual claim.

⚡ Interactive Demo

See exactly what your
C&P exam is missing

This is a real analysis run on a sample VA claim. Three documents, twelve analytical modules, 30 seconds to insights that would take a paralegal two days to find manually.

🚀 Analyze Your Claim — Free
No credit card · No setup · Results in under 2 minutes
Sample Case File
John A. Martinez — Service-Connected Claims Portfolio
Veteran IDSAMPLE-2024-001
Service BranchU.S. Army (12 years)
Documents Analyzed3 files · 47 pages
Analysis DateMay 2024
📄 Rating Decision (2023) 🔬 C&P Exam — Dr. Richardson 📝 Nexus Letter — Dr. Patel
3
Critical Examiner Errors
2
Missed Secondary Pathways
4
Conditions in Evidence Matrix
$61K+
Est. Retroactive Back-Pay at Risk
⚖️ Not Legal Advice. This identifies potential examiner errors for informational purposes. Consult an accredited VA claims agent or attorney before taking action.
🔬
C&P Exam Error Detection
Dr. T. Richardson, DBQ dated 03/14/2023 — Initial Claim
INADEQUATE EXAM
Critical
Missing DeLuca Factor Analysis
38 CFR § 4.40 / § 4.45 · M21-1 III.iv.3.D.2.b
CUE Viable ▼
Finding
The examiner documented range-of-motion measurements for lumbar spine (Flexion 45°, Extension 20°) but completely omitted assessment of pain during motion, pain at end-range, weakened movement, excess fatigability, and functional impairment with repetitive use. The DeLuca factors are mandatory under 38 CFR § 4.40 for any musculoskeletal DBQ. Their absence means the true functional impairment has been underrated.
Verbatim from Exam Report
"ROM: Lumbar flexion 45°, extension 20°, lateral flexion bilateral 15°. Strength 4/5 bilateral lower extremity. No neurological deficits noted." — C&P DBQ, Section 3
Legal Basis
Under DeLuca v. Brown (8 Vet. App. 202, 1995), examiners must assess the additional limitation of motion due to pain on use, weakened movement, excess fatigability, and incoordination. The M21-1 requires examiners to document functional impairment both at rest and after three repetitions. Failure to do so renders the examination inadequate and non-probative.
💡 Request a new examination under Barr v. Nicholson on grounds of inadequacy. In the request, specifically cite the omission of DeLuca factors and provide private nexus noting the true functional loss. This is also viable as a CUE if a rating decision relied on this examination.
Critical
Inadequate Nexus Rationale — Hypertension
38 CFR § 3.303(a) · Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498
▼
Finding
The examiner stated hypertension is "less likely than not" related to service but provided no medical rationale, no citation to service records, and no acknowledgment of the veteran's documented in-service stressor events. Under Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, a medical opinion that fails to discuss the relevant evidence and provide an adequate rationale is entitled to no probative weight.
Verbatim from Exam Report
"Hypertension: Less likely as not related to military service. Veteran has family history of hypertension." — C&P DBQ, Section 7
What's Missing
The examiner did not address: (1) the veteran's documented combat-related PTSD, which is medically associated with hypertension via the stress-cardiovascular axis; (2) three in-service sick call visits for elevated blood pressure readings; (3) the peer-reviewed literature on PTSD-HTN comorbidity. The nexus opinion rests entirely on family history — a single negative factor — while ignoring the positive evidence.
💡 Submit a private nexus letter addressing all three omitted factors. The examiner's bare conclusion without rationale is vulnerable to challenge under Nieves-Rodriguez. A well-reasoned private nexus that affirmatively addresses the PTSD-cardiovascular literature will likely outweigh this opinion.
Moderate
No Post-Exercise ROM Measurement
38 CFR § 4.45 · M21-1 Part III, Subpart iv, Ch. 3, Sec. D
▼
Finding
Range-of-motion measurements were taken only at rest. The M21-1 requires the examiner to note whether ROM is further limited after three repetitions of motion (the "repetitive use test"). Failure to perform this test typically means the examination is inadequate for rating purposes, particularly for conditions like lumbar spondylosis where functional loss on use is often greater than at rest.
💡 Document your typical functional loss after activity (e.g., "after walking 15 minutes, I can only bend to 20°"). This contemporaneous lay evidence fills the evidentiary gap and supports a request for a new exam that performs the repetitive-use test.
🔗
Secondary Connection Inference
AI-identified pathways the rating decision did not consider
2 MISSED PATHWAYS
Hypertension ⚠ Not Rated Secondary
PTSD (Service-Connected, 70%) → Secondary Causation → Hypertension (Denied, Non-Service-Connected)
Strong Nexus
Medical Rationale
PTSD produces chronic sympathetic nervous system activation, elevating cortisol and catecholamines. This is a well-established cardiovascular stressor pathway. Longitudinal studies show veterans with PTSD have a 35-40% higher incidence of hypertension compared to controls, independent of family history.

The veteran's PTSD was rated 70% service-connected as of January 2021. Hypertension first appeared in medical records in April 2021 — three months after PTSD rating. The temporal relationship is consistent with secondary causation.
38 CFR § 3.310(a) — Secondary SC
Evidence in Your Records
✅ PTSD service-connected at 70%
✅ Hypertension onset post-PTSD rating
✅ Three prior sick call visits for elevated BP
✅ Treating cardiologist notes: "stress-related component"

What's missing: A private nexus letter from a physician specifically stating hypertension is at least as likely as not caused by or aggravated by service-connected PTSD.
⚠ Missing: Private Nexus Letter
Right Lower Extremity Radiculopathy ⚠ Not Claimed
Lumbar Spondylosis (Service-Connected, 20%) → Direct Causation → Radiculopathy (Not Filed)
Moderate Nexus
Medical Rationale
The C&P exam notes "4/5 bilateral lower extremity strength" — a measurable neurological deficit consistent with L4-L5 nerve root compression from lumbar spondylosis. Radiculopathy secondary to service-connected lumbar conditions is one of the most commonly granted secondary claims.

The examiner documented the finding but never connected it to the lumbar condition or recommended evaluation for radiculopathy. This is an error of omission.
38 CFR § 3.310(a) — Secondary SC
Supporting Evidence in Records
✅ Strength deficit documented: 4/5 bilateral LE
✅ Lumbar spondylosis service-connected
✅ Treating physician noted "intermittent shooting pain down right leg"

What's missing: A formal claim for radiculopathy as secondary to lumbar spondylosis, with supporting nexus. Rated separately at 10–20% if granted, this adds meaningful back-pay.
⚠ Missing: Secondary Claim Filed
📊
Evidence Mapping Matrix
Evidence strength vs. 38 CFR criteria by condition
4 CONDITIONS
Condition (VASRD DC) Status SC Evidence Nexus Strength CFR Rating Criteria Evidence Gaps
Lumbar Spondylosis
DC 5237
 ● 20% Granted STR (in-service) C&P Exam Treating MD 87%
§ 4.71a — Flexion limited to 45°. Criteria for 40% requires flexion to 30° or less. Under-rated by at least one tier if DeLuca functional loss applied.
DeLuca not assessed
PTSD
DC 9411
 ● 70% Granted Combat records Psych eval Buddy letters 94%
§ 4.130 — 70% appropriate. 100% criteria: total occupational and social impairment. Current occupational records may support increase.
 ✓ Well-documented
Hypertension
DC 7101
 ● Denied Sick call records Cardiologist note 31%
§ 4.104 — Diastolic pressure predominantly 110 or more = 60%. Current readings need documentation. Primary denial overlooks secondary SC via PTSD.
No secondary claim filed
No private nexus
Right LE Radiculopathy
DC 8520
 ● Not Filed C&P strength deficit Treating MD 58%
§ 4.124a — Mild incomplete paralysis of external popliteal nerve = 10%. Moderate = 20%. Evidence supports at minimum 10% secondary to lumbar SC.
Claim not submitted
No formal diagnosis

Run this analysis on your actual case

Upload your C&P exams, rating decisions, and nexus letters. Get examiner error detection, secondary pathway discovery, and a full evidence matrix — in under 2 minutes.

🚀 Upload Your Documents — Free Learn How It Works
No login required to start
AES-256 encrypted storage
Documents never shared
SOC 2 audit logging