The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient consideration of the Veteran's lay statements regarding his in-service skin symptoms and post-service diagnosis of tinea cruris, tinea corporis, and tinea pedis. The examiner is asked to consider these statements and provide an opinion on whether it is at least as likely as not that the conditions are related to herbicide exposure.
The deciding factor: The Board found the November 2015 VA examiner's opinion insufficient due to its failure to address the Veteran's lay statements regarding his in-service skin symptoms and post-service diagnosis of tinea cruris, tinea corporis, and tinea pedis.
- Claimed conditions
- tinea cruris, tinea corporis, tinea pedis
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 25, 2019
- Citation
- 19149720
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.
- Partly granted
The Board granted service connection for tinea pedis and dismissed the claims for tinnitus, multiple sclerosis, neck condition, and low back condition.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board remands the claim for a bilateral foot disability to obtain further development, including adequate VA examinations and opinions.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for hearing loss disability, neck strain, and tinea pedis. The Veteran's claim for an increased initial disability rating in excess of 10 percent for tinnitus was also denied. The claims for service connection for right and left knee patellofemoral pain syndrome were remanded.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for various service-connected conditions, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating under applicable criteria.
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.