The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical evidence regarding the relationship between the Veteran's melanoma and his service-connected chloracne, as well as the issue of whether the Veteran's melanoma is related to in-service sun exposure. The Veteran will need to provide VA with any relevant treatment records and undergo a VA examination.
The deciding factor: The Board lacks sufficient medical evidence to determine if the Veteran’s melanoma may be related to his service-connected chloracne or due to in-service sun exposure.
- Claimed conditions
- melanoma
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 27, 2019
- Citation
- 19196388
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,757 · 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 19196388.
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.
- Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for melanoma, to include SCC of the right hand, finding that it is at least as likely as not caused by exposure to radiation during service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for hypertension, equilibrium disorder (claimed as bad balance and equilibrium), bilateral restless leg syndrome, bilateral upper extremity tremor, melanoma, and acquired psychiatric disability due to a lack of adequate medical opinions regarding exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune and Agent Orange in Japan.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, hypertension, and melanoma. The Veteran's claims were based on exposure to herbicides at Fort McClellan, but the evidence did not establish actual exposure.
- Denied
The Veteran's lung cancer and metastatic malignant melanoma were not shown to be related to service, including exposure to herbicide agents or ultraviolet radiation from the sun.
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.