The Board denied an effective date prior to February 23, 1999 for service connection of the cause of death due to metastatic melanoma. The decision found that the Nehmer case did not apply and that the correct laws and facts were before them.
The deciding factor: The Board determined that the Nehmer case holdings were not applicable to the appellant's claim as her original claim was filed in January 1985, which is prior to September 25, 1985 when the Nehmer decision took effect.
- Claimed conditions
- metastatic melanoma
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- November 23, 2009
- Citation
- 0944617
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. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0944617.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for metastatic melanoma, finding that it is related to in-service sun exposure.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's cause of death was not related to his military service, including any in-service dental work or ionizing radiation exposure. The Board denied the claim for service connection.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a duty to assist error, specifically regarding the relationship between the Veteran's atherosclerotic cerebrovascular accident and his in-service exposure to herbicide agents. The examiner is asked to provide an opinion on whether this condition qualifies as ischemic heart disease for purposes of presumptive service connection.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's death was attributed to metastatic melanoma, which the Board finds meets the first requirement of service connection. However, due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error, the Board must now obtain medical opinions regarding the nature and etiology of both conditions.
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.