The Veteran's oral cavity cancer is being remanded for a VA examination to determine its etiology, including whether it is related to his in-service exposure to herbicide agents.
The deciding factor: The examiner must opine on the relationship between the Veteran's oral cavity cancer and his service, including presumed exposure to herbicide agents.
- Claimed conditions
- oral cavity cancer, squamous cell carcinoma of the anterior floor of the mouth
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- May 15, 2019
- Citation
- 19137723
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,913 · Granted: 30% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 19137723.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the claim for service connection for oral cavity cancer to obtain an adequate VA opinion regarding the relationship between the Veteran's diagnosed condition and her in-service exposures.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided the Veteran's claim for service connection for oral cavity cancer due to exposure to herbicide agents is remanded. The issue of secondary service connection for oral cavity cancer due to lung cancer is also remanded.
- Denied
The Board denied the appellant's claims of service connection for the cause of the veteran's death and Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) benefits pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318 due to a lack of legal merit, as the veteran's cancer was attributable to his use of tobacco products during service.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
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.