The Veteran's sebaceous cyst disability, including scars, has been productive of subjective complaints of pain and itching; however, none of his scars were shown to be visible on the head, face, or neck; result in an area or areas exceeding 6 square inches (39 sq. cm); cause limitation of motion; unstable; or productive of pain on examination. Therefore, the criteria for a rating in excess of 10 percent have not been met.
The deciding factor: The Veteran's scars did not meet the criteria for disfigurement as defined by Diagnostic Code 7800 and therefore, no higher rating could be assigned under this code.
- Claimed conditions
- sebaceous cysts
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 8, 2012
- Citation
- 1220278
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 1220278.
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.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for skin disorders, including basal and squamous cell carcinomas, sebaceous cysts, and pityriasis rosea, as there is no evidence linking these conditions to the Veteran's military service or herbicide exposure.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for sebaceous cysts, finding no evidence of a relationship to service or any other compensable period.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for service connection for a skin disability was reopened due to the submission of new evidence. The case is remanded for additional development, including obtaining non-VA treatment records and an adequate VA medical opinion regarding the etiology of his skin disabilities.
- Remanded (sent back)
The VA has remanded the case due to incomplete treatment records and the need for a new examination to assess the current severity of the Veteran's acne vulgaris with sebaceous cysts.
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.