Verdict
Technical — fix and resubmit
The route here is correcting the identified defect and resubmitting as a corrected claim, inside the timely-filing window, rather than arguing the decision.
Send what was asked for rather than arguing the decision. Work from the payer's own published documentation requirements for the procedure so the resubmission cannot be judged deficient a second time, and watch the response window — leaving the request unanswered turns a 252 into a 226.
The verdict cannot be settled from the CARC alone — the remark code that arrived with it carries the specific reason.
The appealability verdicts on these pages are Dentovio's editorial classification. No standards body or payer publishes an appealability taxonomy: X12 defines what a code means, not what to do about it. Each verdict is built from the code's own mechanics and the payer and federal documents cited on the page, and it is a starting point for triage rather than a prediction of any outcome.