Veterans’ RightsAn independent resource for veterans
← All decisions
Remanded (sent back)

The Veteran's claim for service connection for anemia and artery stenosis (bilateral carotid stenosis and celiac stenosis) has been denied. The Board found that the conditions were not shown as chronic in service or within a presumptive period, and continuity of symptomatology was not established.,The Veteran's claim for service connection for malignant neoplasm of the oropharynx (claimed as cancer in tonsil) is remanded due to insufficient evidence on direct service connection. The Board noted that the issue may be related to presumed herbicide agent exposure, but a VA examination is needed to determine if there is any link.,The Veteran's claim for service connection for lung cancer is also remanded. The Board found that the issue may be related to his oropharyngeal cancer, which was not fully addressed in the previous decision.

The deciding factor: The conditions were not shown as chronic in service and did not manifest within a presumptive period.,There is insufficient evidence on direct service connection for malignant neoplasm of the oropharynx. The issue may be related to presumed herbicide agent exposure, but further examination is needed to determine if there is any link.,The lung cancer claim was remanded as it may be related to his oropharyngeal cancer, which was not fully addressed in the previous decision.

Claimed conditions
anemia, artery stenosis (bilateral carotid stenosis and celiac stenosis), malignant neoplasm, oropharynx (claimed as cancer in tonsil), lung cancer
How they argued it
Not specified
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
January 28, 2020
Citation
20006946

Veterans Law Judge

D. JOHNSON

Decisions by this judge: 1,861 · Granted: 27% (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 20006946.

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.

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.