The Board found that the veteran's skin disorders, including psoriasis and tinea pedis, were not incurred in or aggravated by service, and specifically denied service connection based on presumed exposure to herbicides.
The deciding factor: The VA examination and personal hearing testimony did not establish a link between the current skin conditions and service, particularly given that no such conditions were noted during service.
- Claimed conditions
- psoriasis, tinea pedis
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 16, 2006
- Citation
- 0604510
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 396 · Granted: 19% (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 0604510.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
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 for service connection for heart attack, kidney stones, polycythemia vera, diabetes mellitus type 2, and psoriasis is remanded due to inadequate VA opinions regarding the etiology of these conditions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's diagnosed bilateral tinea pedis, which is a condition related to service.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for a TDIU based on a single disability, finding that his psychiatric disorder alone did not render him unemployable and that he was not in receipt of a total disability rating based on a single service-connected condition.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to errors in considering all conditions and a need for an addendum opinion regarding the relationship between the Veteran's current right great toe / foot disability and his claimed frostbite injury.
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.