The Board has ordered a supplemental opinion from the gastroenterologist who provided an August 2012 opinion, and if unavailable, another physician with similar expertise should be asked to review the claims file. The case will then be readjudicated.
The deciding factor: The Board found that further action is warranted due to the appellant's recent move and the need for a supplemental opinion from the gastroenterologist who provided an August 2012 opinion, or another physician with similar expertise if unavailable.
- Claimed conditions
- Adenocarcinoma of the esophagus
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- May 28, 2014
- Citation
- 1424083
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 1424083.
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 Board denied the appellant's claims for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death and benefits under Chapter 35, finding no evidence linking the adenocarcinoma of the esophagus to military service or exposure to herbicides.
- Granted
The Board has determined that the veteran's death was caused by his service-connected hiatal hernia and/or gastroesophageal reflux disease, which began in service.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
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.