The Board denied service connection for residuals from a head injury and a scar on the head as there was no in-service incurrence or aggravation of an injury.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the Veteran's statements at the June and July 1968 and March 1969 reports of medical history and examinations were more credible than his recent statement regarding the alleged injury, and he did not have any notable scars reported in these earlier records.
- Claimed conditions
- residuals from a head injury, scar on the head
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 20, 2017
- Citation
- 1722726
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 1722726.
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.
- Partly granted
The Board granted service connection for a scar on the veteran's head, resolving all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran.
- Dismissed
The Veteran withdrew his appeals regarding the service connection for a head injury, scar on the head, and headaches, as well as the initial rating for bilateral hearing loss.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for a scar on the head is denied as there is no current diagnosis of a scar and recent VA examination did not find any visible scar.,The Veteran's claim for varicose veins of the left leg is denied as there is no evidence that they began during service or are related to an in-service injury, event, or disease.,The Veteran's claim for erectile dysfunction including as secondary to service-connected disabilities is remanded due to lack of a medical opinion on whether it was aggravated by service-connected conditions.,The Veteran's claim for bilateral plantar fasciitis is remanded due to the need for an examination and opinion regarding its relationship to in-service complaints of right heel pain.,The Veteran's claim for right ear hearing loss is remanded due to lack of a medical opinion on whether it was related to service-connected tinnitus.,The Veteran's claim for gastritis is remanded due to the need for an examination and opinion regarding its relationship to in-service complaints of gastroenteritis.,The Veteran's claim for hypertension is remanded due to the need for an examination and opinion regarding its relationship to in-service blood pressure readings.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate opinion regarding whether the Veteran's scar on his head is related to service-connected acne of the scalp.
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.