The Veteran's folliculitis did not meet the criteria for a rating in excess of 10 percent, as it never involved more than 5 percent of the entire body or exposed areas and did not require systemic therapy with corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs.
The deciding factor: The record does not show that the Veteran's folliculitis ever involved 20% or more of either exposed, or non-exposed, areas, nor did it require any systemic therapy for a total duration of six weeks or more during the past 12-month period.
- Claimed conditions
- folliculitis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 19, 2009
- Citation
- 0910406
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,699 · Granted: 17% (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 0910406.
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.
- Granted
The Veteran's service connection claims for pseudofolliculitis barbae and hypertrophic scarring as secondary to now service-connected pseudofolliculitis barbae are granted. The remaining claims of entitlement to service connection for a skin condition other than pseudofolliculitis barbae, bilateral toenail fungus, and genital warts or syphilis are remanded due to the need for additional development.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's skin disability (atopic dermatitis, folliculitis, seborrheic dermatitis, and seborrheic keratosis) on a direct basis. The decision finds that there is at least an equipoise of evidence to support the claim, thus resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claim for service connection for skin disorder, including epidermal inclusion cysts. The decision is based on inadequate VA examinations and a duty to assist error before the May 2025 rating decision.
- Dismissed
The appeal for service connection of multiple conditions, including PTSD with sleep disturbance and several physical injuries, was dismissed because the issues were already on appeal to the Board.
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.