The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining a medical opinion regarding whether the veteran's esophageal cancer was related to his service or exposure to Agent Orange.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner did not provide sufficient rationale in support of their opinions and another remand is required to ensure compliance with the Board's instructions.
- Claimed conditions
- esophageal adenocarcinoma
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 12, 2006
- Citation
- 0617125
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 0617125.
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 Board remands the case to obtain an adequate medical opinion regarding the link between the Veteran's esophageal adenocarcinoma and his exposure to Agent Orange during service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD, sleep disorder, GERD, and esophageal adenocarcinoma due to duty-to-assist errors. The Veteran will receive a new examination.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for the cause of his death, finding that there was no evidence to support a direct link between his in-service exposure to radar and his esophageal adenocarcinoma. The Board also found that another relevant service-connected disability did not contribute to his death.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation, and the Board has granted entitlement to TDIU. The case is remanded for further development regarding his esophageal adenocarcinoma rating and housebound status.
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.