The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining VA and non-VA treatment records, developing the appellant's claim based on exposure to radiation, issuing a statement of the case regarding the issue of recognition as the veteran's spouse for purposes of VA death pension benefits, and considering service connection for the cause of the veteran's death.
The deciding factor: The Board found that further development is required due to new evidence submitted by the appellant and the need to consider exposure to radiation in accordance with applicable regulations.
- Claimed conditions
- hepatic carcinoma
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 29, 2006
- Citation
- 0630748
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,547 · Granted: 20% (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 0630748.
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 Veteran died in 2012 due to sepsis, hepatic carcinoma, end stage liver disease, and hepatitis C. The Board found no service connection for any of these conditions.
- Granted
The Veteran's death was caused by his service-connected cirrhosis of the liver, which is presumed for former POWs. The Board granted service connection for the cause of death.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board is remanding the case to obtain a medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's service-connected diabetes mellitus and PTSD contributed to his death from hepatic carcinoma and cirrhosis of the liver. The appellant must also be provided with VCAA notice specific to DIC claims.
- Denied
The Board found that the veteran's death was not due to a service-connected disability, and denied both the claim for service connection for cause of death and the claim for service connection for liver cancer. The appellant is also ineligible for VA pension benefits as she did not meet the legal requirements.
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.