The veteran's current hydrocele or residual of any hydrocele is being evaluated for possible service connection, with a recommendation for an examination to determine the nature and etiology of the condition.
The deciding factor: The Board found that further evaluation was needed due to conflicting evidence regarding the nature and timing of the veteran's hydrocele.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral hydrocele
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 25, 2004
- Citation
- 0405234
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,613 · Granted: 30% (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 0405234.
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.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for multiple conditions, including hypertension, right ankle sprain, conjunctival inclusion cyst, and others, as there was no evidence of current disability during or near the period on appeal.
- Partly granted
The veteran's claims for service connection for left knee patellar instability and right shoulder strain with tendinosis were granted. All other issues were denied or remanded.
- Partly granted
The veteran's claims for service connection for several conditions were denied. However, the veteran was granted an initial 10 percent rating for Bell's palsy and an initial 50 percent rating for migraine headaches and sleep apnea. Several other issues were remanded for further review.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the Veteran's appeal should be re-docketed under the Legacy system and his March 2019 VA Form 10182 is accepted as a timely NOD for the issues on appeal. The Veteran must file a VA Form 9 substantive appeal to perfect his appeal.
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.