The Veteran's malaria is inactive and does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating.,The Veteran’s bilateral foot condition may have worsened since the last VA examination. An updated VA skin examination should be provided.,The Board has conceded herbicide exposure in service, but remands to obtain a VA opinion on whether hypertension is related to service and/or herbicide exposure.,The Veteran's hepatitis claim requires additional information or an examination due to his assertions of potential exposure during service.
The deciding factor: Active malaria was not shown at any time during the pendency of the appeal, thus no compensable rating can be granted.,There is insufficient evidence to determine if the Veteran's bilateral foot condition has worsened since the last VA examination. An updated VA skin examination should be provided.,The Board has conceded herbicide exposure in service but remands due to lack of a definitive opinion on whether hypertension is related to service and/or herbicide exposure.,The Veteran asserts potential exposure during service, requiring additional information or an examination to determine the etiology of his hepatitis.
- Claimed conditions
- malaria, tinea pedis and onychomycosis (bilateral foot condition), hypertension, hepatitis
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 26, 2019
- Citation
- 19189064
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,188 · Granted: 23% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted 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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 19189064.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for hypertension and peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper and lower extremities due to insufficient medical opinions regarding their etiology.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including VA examinations.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for additional development due to conflicting opinions regarding service connection for peripheral neuropathy, hypertension, and skin disabilities related to herbicide exposure.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for service connection for hypertension and increased rating for anxiety disorder have been denied. The Board found that there is no evidence of a current disability meeting the criteria for hypertension, and the Veteran's anxiety disorder does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.
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.