The Board denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for bilateral knee disorder and skin disorder (vitiligo), finding no evidence of chronic conditions during service or within one year post-service, and concluding that any current conditions are not related to service.
The deciding factor: There is no medical evidence linking the current diagnoses of bilateral knee degenerative joint disease and vitiligo to service. The Veteran's service treatment records do not document chronic ongoing treatment for these conditions.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral knee degenerative joint disease, vitiligo
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 19, 2017
- Citation
- 1740660
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 1740660.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the cases of service connection for vitiligo and obstructive sleep apnea due to inadequate VA examinations. The Veteran will need new VA examinations to address these issues.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for vitiligo, finding that the Veteran's current condition started during his active duty service and had continuity to the present. The decision is based on the Veteran's lay statements and VA treatment records.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the issues of service connection for various cancers and related conditions due to errors in obtaining relevant medical records and inadequate opinions regarding their etiology.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a duty-to-assist error, requiring an additional medical opinion on the etiology of the Veteran's vitiligo.
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.