The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's multiple sclerosis is related to his presumed herbicide exposure during service. The claim will be reviewed again with consideration of a new medical opinion.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner was not able to provide an adequate opinion on the relationship between the Veteran's multiple sclerosis and his presumed Agent Orange exposure due to insufficient evidence in the claims file.
- Claimed conditions
- Multiple Sclerosis
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 6, 2016
- Citation
- 1622602
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 1622602.
What this means for you
A partial grant means some issues were granted while others were denied or remanded — common in multi-issue claims. Look at which issues went which way, and how each was argued.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case for additional development, including obtaining records of the Appellant's reserve component service and conducting a VA examination to determine if her multiple sclerosis is related to service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that new and relevant evidence has been received to warrant readjudication of the previously denied claims for service connection for Multiple Sclerosis, Hypertension, and Headaches. The case is being remanded to allow for further consideration.
- Denied
The Veteran's right foot AFO brace did not cause wear and tear to her clothing, specifically pants, during the 2022 calendar year. Therefore, she is denied a clothing allowance for that year.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a duty-to-assist error, specifically regarding private treatment records from June 2015 to October 2017. The Veteran is asked to provide authorization for these records.
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.