The Board has remanded the case due to failure to properly notify the veteran of the new and material evidence standard, and to address the implications of the receipt of a VA Form 9 in August 1962.
The deciding factor: The decision was based on an incorrect reliance on a May 2001 letter that did not address the new and material evidence standard.
- Claimed conditions
- removal of the left testicle
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 5, 2004
- Citation
- 0403341
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,467 · Granted: 18% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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 0403341.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining updated VA and private treatment records, as well as medical opinions regarding the nature and etiology of his liver, colon, skin, and left testicle disabilities. The Veteran also needs to be provided with a Statement of the Case on the issue of an initial compensable rating for candida rash of the penis.
- Denied
The Board denied reopening of the veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, finding no new and material evidence. The veteran was not recognized as a former prisoner of war (POW).
- Denied
The Board has determined that the veteran's claim for a higher rating for residuals of trauma to the genitourinary tract, with recurrent epididymitis, removal of the left testicle, and urinary retention is denied as his condition does not meet the criteria for a disability rating in excess of 30 percent.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development, including obtaining SSA records and providing proper notice regarding secondary service connection.
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.