The Board has ordered further development due to pending evidence and the court's decision invalidating previous regulations. The case is now remanded for additional development at the RO level.
The deciding factor: The Federal Circuit invalidated the previous regulations, which required the Board to undertake certain actions without remanding cases to the AOJ. As a result, the VA General Counsel issued guidance allowing VBA to resume all development functions except those statutorily permitted by the Board.
- Claimed conditions
- dermatological disorder
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- September 4, 2003
- Citation
- 0322624
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 0322624.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
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 the Veteran's claims for service connection for a dermatological disorder and hepatitis C, finding that there was no evidence linking these conditions to his military service or exposure to herbicides.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has granted service connection for a dermatological disorder, diagnosed as seborrheic dermatitis. The issue of entitlement to service connection for a respiratory disorder (sleep apnea) is pending and will be addressed in the REMAND portion.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board found that the Veteran's current dermatological disorder was not manifested in service or for many years thereafter, and is not shown to be related to service, including any chemical dioxin exposure. Therefore, service connection for a dermatological disorder is not warranted.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for additional development due to issues with notification and assistance.
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.