The Board denied the veteran's application to reopen his claim for service connection for orchiectomy, residuals of undescended testicle due to lack of new and material evidence.
The deciding factor: The submitted evidence was deemed cumulative or inherently not credible.
- Claimed conditions
- orchiectomy, undescended testicle
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- July 2, 2003
- Citation
- 0314470
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. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0314470.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied benefits for the child born with other covered birth defects because the mother is not a Vietnam Veteran.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's appeal for an initial compensable rating for chronic left testicular pain and orchiectomy, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has granted service connection for chronic left testicular pain and orchiectomy, finding that the evidence is in approximate balance as to whether these conditions are related to a groin injury during active duty training (ACDUTRA) in Macedonia. The decision is based on credible lay testimony of an in-service injury and medical opinions supporting a link between the current condition and service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of compliance with previous directives and the need for a new VA examination to assess the combined effect of the Veteran's service-connected disabilities on his employability.
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.